Factors affecting the implementation of an electronic Pest Recommendation Network for pesticide
applicators in Montana
by William Thomas Lanier
A thesis plan submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in
Agricultural Education
Montana State University
© Copyright by William Thomas Lanier (2001)
Abstract:
The problem is how to deliver pest management information to pesticide applicators, where they live
and work, in a manner that does not intimidate them. The delivery structure must allow for the effective
use, safety and hazard information to be ‘ incorporated into the daily decision-making process.
The objectives of this study were to determine the factors that may enhance or prohibit use of the Pest
Recommendation Network (PRN) and how valuable selected pest control topics are to pesticide
applicators in Montana Pesticide Applicator Training (PAT) Region 2. The six factors that may have
affected a participants use of the WWW were lack of hardware, software, monthly service provider
charges, familiarity with what the WWW offers, lack of computer technical assistance or training
and/or high telephone line charges. The selected pest control factors were chemical control
information, economic thresholds, crop variety susceptibility information, and pest life cycle conditions
favoring susceptibility, typical infestation pattern in fields, symptoms and look alike symptoms,
cultural control information and knowing required scouting frequency.
The survey group (n = 497) was randomly divided into two groups. Each group received a take-home
worksheet that provided step by step instructions on how to access and receive information from the
PRN. In addition to the worksheet, one group received training that included verbal explanation of 11
Power Point text slides and 3 PRN screen images from the PRN application. The purpose of the
mini-lecture slides were to motivate and familiarize subjects to the availability and value of the PRN.
The control group saw only one text slide referring to the PRN. To use the PRN, the control group
would have to rely on the worksheet instructions.
In summary, the amount of training the participants received at the Region 2 PAT re-certification
program did not significantly affect their access of the PRN. Ranking of the results of the survey
showed that people with access to the Internet found familiarity with what the Internet offers, lack of
computer technical assistance or training, high telephone line charges as the factors that affected their
use of the Internet the most. Participants also ranked chemical control information, economic
thresholds, crop variety susceptibility information, pest life cycle as most valuable to their pest control
decision making. The results of the demographic section of the survey revealed that over half of the
surveyed participants had access to computer hardware, over half used it for farm business and over
half had either access to the Internet or email. FACTORS AFFECTING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN ELECTRONIC PEST
RECOMMENDATION NETWORK FOR PESTICIDE APPLICATORS IN MONTANA
. by
William Thomas Lanier
A thesis plan submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree
of
Master of Science
in
Agricultural Education
MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY
Bozeman, Montana
July 2001
APPROVAL
of a thesis submitted by
Willliam Thomas Lanier
This thesis has been read by each member of the graduate committee and has
been found to be satisfactory regarding content, English usage, format, citations,
bibliographic style, and consistency, and is ready for submission to the college of
Graduate Studies.
'—Chairperson, Graduate Committee
7/ Z 9
/
2 -0 0 /
Dtite /
Approved for the Major Department
fiead, N^joj/Dejiartnient
7-^
Date
-
Approved for the College of Graduate Studies
Graduate Dean
/
Date
iii
STATEMENT OF PERMISSION TO USE
In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for a master’s .
degree at Montana State University, I agree that the Library shall make it available to
borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this paper are allowable
without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made.
Pfirmissiori for extensive quotation from or reproduction of this paper may be
granted by my major professor or, in his absence, by the Dean of Libraries when, in the
opinion of either, the proposed use of the material is for scholarly purposes. Any
copying or use of the material in this paper for financial gain shall not be allowed without
my written permission.
Signature
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The researcher wishes, with all sincerity, to acknowledge those who contributed
to his graduate program and assisted in the completion of this study. Contributors who
made this successful and educationally meaningful experience included: Dr. Van
Shelhamer, my major advisor, for his enthusiasm, support, assistance and perseverance
throughout my graduate program; Dr. Marty Frick and Dr. Greg Johnson and Mr. David
Sharpe, for their assistance and inspiration during my graduate program; Dr. Sue
Blodgett, for allowing the Integrated Pest Management program to accommodate my
graduate degree efforts; and Thomas Anderson for introducing me to Integrated Pest
Management on Andersmide, Island ofFunen, Denmark.
I also want to acknowledge the support and contributions of Reeves Petroff, PAT
Coordinator and Carol Flaherty, Communication Services, Dave Belote and Colleen
Howell, Bridger Systems Inc. and MSU Extension County agents, especially those in the
surveyed counties; Wade Crouch, Judee Wargo, Dan Clark and Chris Onstead.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................ vii
ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................. viii
1.
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING.................................................................. I
Statement of the Problem....................................................................................... 5
Statement of N eed..................................................................................................5
Objectives .............................................................................................................. 8
Assumptions........................................................................................................... 9
Limitations ........................................................................................................... 10
Definition of Term s.............................................................................................. 10
Distance Education .................................................................................. 10
Pesticide Recommendation Network....................................................... 11
Pesticide Applicator Training .................................................................. 11
Case-Based Reasoning............................................................................. 11
2.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE .............................................................................12
Androgogy and PAT ...................................................
Adult Memory in Androgogy............................................................................... 15
Course Design and Androgogy............................................................................ 15
Course Structure and Androgogy......................................................................... 16
Distance Education Defined.................................................................................. 18
Distance Education History ................................................................................. 19
Distance Education Types.................................................................................... 19
Distance Education and PAT in Montana............................................................ 21
Factors Affecting Adoption of Computer Software or Decision Support
Systems in Agriculture............................................................................. 22
Decision Support Systems .......................................................
Possible Methods for Increasing Adoption of Computers by Montana
Producers.....................................................................................
26
Changing Agriculture and Changing Extension .............................................
27
Agriculture and Pesticides ...................................................................................28
Extension Pesticide Applicator Training: History and Mission...........................29
Major PAT Accomplishments and Highlights...................................................... 30
3.
METHODOLOGY
32
TABLE OF CONTENTS - (CONTINUED)
Rationale for Research Design............................................................................. 32
Design of the Study..............................................................................................32
Threats to Internal Validity................................................................
34
Threats to Population Validity.......... ......................................
36
Population Description..........................................................................
Sample and Time Line Description ..................................................................... 39
Results of Survey Instrument Testing................................................................... 40
Similarity of the Samples......................................................................................42
Instrument Design: Pre-session Survey on Paper................................................. 43
Instrument Design: PRN Post Session Survey on the WWW .............................44
4.
FINDINGS ......................................................................................................... 46
Results of the PAT on PRN Access...................................................................... 46
Results of the Paper...............................................................................................47
Section I ...................................................................................................49
Section I I ..................................................................................................48
Section H I.................................................................................................48
5.
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND
RECOMMENDATIONS .....................................................................................54
Summary....... ...................................................................................................... 54
Conclusions........................................................................................................... 56
Implications.......................................................................................................... 57
Recommendations............................................................................................... -58
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................60
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................64
Appendix A.
Appendix B.
Appendix C.
Appendix D.
Appendix E.
Survey of Pesticide Applicators accessing the Web ................................65
Pest Recommendation Network Survey ......................................
67
Pest Recommendation Network Work Sheet........................................... 70
Pest Recommendation Network Training Group Slides.......................... 80
Pest Recommendation Network Control Group S lid e........................-...84
39
Vll
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1.
Frequency of PAT participants responding to pre-training paper survey ..........41
2.
Types of Pesticide Applicators participating in survey......................................... 42
3.
Types of careers participating in survey................................................................ 42
4.
Differences between those responding to the on-line survey with no PRN
training and those with PRN training................................... .............................. 47
5.
Percentage of participants with and without computer resources........................48
6.
Ranked factors affecting PAT participants accessing information on the web .... 49
7.
Pesticide Applicators rank the perceived value of nine factors to their decision
making.................................................................................................................. 50
8.
How participants with access to computers rank factors affecting their use of the
W W W .................................................................................................................. 51
9.
How participants without access to computers rank factors affecting their use of
the WWW ............................................................................................................ 51
10.
How participants with access to computers rank factors valuable to pest control
decisions............................................................................................................... 52
11.
How participants without access to computers rank factors valuable to pest
control decisions
53
viii
ABSTRACT
The problem is how to deliver pest management information to pesticide
applicators, where they live and work, in a manner that does not intimidate them. The
delivery structure must allow for the effective use, safety and hazard information to be
incorporated into the daily decision-making process.
The objectives of this study were to determine the factors that may enhance or
prohibit use of the Pest Recommendation Network (PRN) and how valuable selected pest
control topics are to pesticide applicators in Montana. Pesticide Applicator Training
(PAT) Region 2. The six factors that may have affected a participants use of the WWW
were lack of hardware, software, monthly service provider charges, familiarity with what
the WWW offers, lack of computer technical assistance or training and/or high telephone
line charges. The selected pest control factors were chemical control information,
economic thresholds, crop . variety susceptibility information, and pest life cycle
conditions favoring susceptibility, typical infestation pattern in fields, symptoms and
look alike symptoms, cultural control information and knowing required scouting
frequency.
The survey group (n = 497) was randomly divided into two groups. Each group
received a take-home worksheet that provided step by step instructions on how to access
and receive information from the PRN. In addition to the worksheet, one group received
training that included verbal explanation of 11 Power Point text slides and 3 PRN screen
images from the PRN application. The purpose of the mini-lecture slides were to
motivate and familiarize subjects to the availability and value of the PRN. The control
group saw only one text slide referring to the PRN. To use the PRN, the control group
would have to rely on the worksheet instructions.
In summary, the amount of training the participants received at the Region 2 PAT
re-certification program did not significantly affect their access of the PRN. Ranking of
the results of the survey showed that people with access to the Internet found familiarity
with what the Intemet offers, lack of computer technical assistance or training, high
telephone line charges as the factors that affected their use of the Intemet the most.
Participants also ranked chemical control information, economic thresholds, crop variety
susceptibility information, pest life cycle as most valuable to their pest control decision
making. The results of the demographic section of the survey revealed that over half of
the surveyed participants had access to computer hardware, over half used it for farm
business and over half had either access to the Internet or email.
I
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING
Since the beginning of the nationally recognized Pesticide Applicator Training
(PAT) program in 1975, rapid changes in pest control practices and public opinion have
caused constant refinement of pesticide safety and applicator practices. Gilmore (1994)
stated that, “There continues to be increasing attention given to food related issues in our
society as the public becomes more aware of the benefits and risks associated with food
production, distribution and preservation, preparation, and consumption patterns” (p. I).
Some of this concern is substantiated by facts. “Recent reports from the Food and Drug
Aflministratinri and Centers for Disease Control indicate that about 33 million people, or
14% of the U.S. population, become ill each year from microorganisms in foods, leading
to 9,000 deaths annually” (Barton, 1992, p. I).
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) enforces strict control on pesticide
licenses. Farm Worker Protection Standards are strictly enforced, even on family farms.
Banks investigate pesticide disposal practices before they accept agricultural land as
collateral. On August 3,1996, President Clinton signed the Food Quality Protection Act
(FQPA) into law. This act allowed greater protection for consumers, particularly infants
and children by using a comprehensive, integrated approach to risk assessment and risk
management using consistent, health based standards. A positive effect of this
2
perception, from an agricultural point of view, is that the public is very supportive of
programs that make their food supply safer.
Montana agriculture has been recognized as a source of abundant safe food and
still is, but public perception has changed. Whitford (1993) says negative public opinion
is due mostly to how people perceive risk. While farmers are familiar with the costs and
benefits of pesticide use, the public, removed from the damage crop pests can cause, is
not. The nonagricultural population perceives pesticides as risky because others apply
them, are doubtful of the real value and are concerned about unknown or delayed health
problems. As a result of scrutiny by the customer, producers of food have responded
with scientifically accountable methods of managing pesticide use.
Integrated Pest Management (!PM) is one of these methods. Dr. Sue Blodgett, the
EPM coordinator at Montana State University, suggests EPM practices include; I)
applying chemical pest control based on a set of decisions other than pest presence or
absence; 2) Scientific thresholds that require knowledge of pest identification and life
cycles; 3) Non-chemical or cultural pest control practices that weigh future agronomic
considerations with the economic realities of arid crop production; and 4) Chemical
control considerations that not only include cost, timeliness and efficacy but also far
reaching legal considerations regarding mammalian toxicity, ground water
contamination, and pest resistance and used container disposal. This diversity and
unprecedented increase in “need to know” information has created a demand for pesticide
education information delivery (PAT) to where people live and work.
3
Thus, as production agriculture in Montana adjusts to meet the demands of a wary
public, the need for technically trained employees who are accountable for their actions
has increased. National and state governments and land grant colleges like Montana
State University (MSU) have responded by formalizing programs, such as PAT, which
train people who apply agricultural chemicals. MSU Extension, the information source
for PAT, has a database developed through interactions with the MSU Insect, Weed and
Disease Diagnostic Labs. The database contains the daily recommendations made by
Extension specialists and staff. These recommendations are made for homeowners and
producers involved with agriculture in Montana. Recommendations include pest
identification and life cycles and non-chemical cultural controls. The recommendations
are the results of national research and weigh agronomic considerations regarding arid
crop production. The chemical control recommendations entered not only include cost,
timeliness, and efficacy, but also are scrutinized for legal considerations regarding
mammalian toxicity, groundwater contamination, pest resistance and used container
disposal.
Currently, private and commercial PAT sessions use traditional delivery methods
during the fall and winter that include demonstrations, slide-illustrated talks, and use of
videotapes. In the case of PAT meetings and correspondence courses, three criteria
affect the acceptance or use of the PAT program. Acceptance of information delivered
by either traditional means or distance delivery technology is, Bander (personal
communication, January 1998) said, affected by three criteria: They are; I) how much
participant comfort is affected by travel, scheduling and personal commitments; 2)
4
Presentation quality and how the information is formatted and given relevancy to the
audiences concerns; and 3) Level of promotion.
While traditional delivery methods provide basic pest information on the major
crops to a significant portion of Montana producers, the three criteria and their negative
effects on PAT education will increase. Solutions to problems affecting PAT attendance
are available.
It has been proposed to deliver an innovative education program to PAT
participants. This educational program would provide a novel electronic resource
accessible by pesticide applicators when pest information is required and management
decisions are being made. In other words, this program would deliver information to
where people live and work, increasing their personal comfort. DeYoung, et al. (1995)
reported that “a pilot effort (Oregon) revealed ways that networked computers can
facilitate communication between diverse audiences and how university extended
education can be electronically delivered to participants upon demand” (page I). To
dramatically reduce the costs of delivering this information (incurred by MSU Extension)
through traditional-means, PAT participants could be provided with improved and
individualized information using technology like the World Wide Web (WWW) and
methods of distance education. Rossman (2000) defines distance education by saying:
“Distance education is planned learning that normally occurs in a different
place from teaching and as a result requires special techniques of course
design, special instructional techniques, special methods of
communication by electronic and other technology, as well as special
organizational and administrative arrangements” (p. I).
5
Perfect candidates for distance education are the three politically diverse and
geographically separated groups discussed previously: A suspicious public worried
about their food supply, agricultural producers who employ scientific practices to
produce food and sources of research based information like national and state
governments and land grant institutions like MSU.
The WWW and distance education methods could act as the synchronization that
correctly meshes the gears moving researched based information from government
agencies charged with training to those who produce food for a demanding public.
Experience suggests that as with traditional methods there are criteria that will
negatively affect participation in the PRN. Research methods are available to discover
the factors which could prohibit or enhance the implementation of the PRN for use by
Montana pesticide applicators.
Statement of the Problem
The problem is how to deliver pest management information to Montana pesticide
applicators, where they live and work, in a manner that does not intimidate them. The
delivery structure must allow for the effective use, safety and hazard information to be
incorporated into the daily decision-making process.
Statement of Need
Increasing public pressure and reluctance to fund the traditional Montana
educational system suggested that priorities, like remote information delivery, need to be
6
realigned. These priorities will be the result of public pressure, “No longer passive,
members of the nonagricultural public are demanding the farming community, as well as
state and federal regulatory agencies, provide greater accountability in identifying and
preventing risks associated with pesticide use” (Whitford, 1993, p. I). Thus, the PAT
program is charged with providing pesticide use, hazards, safety, and pest management
information to new licensees and re-certification applicants.
Strong participation in an effective PAT educational system is vital to successful
delivery and implementation by the user community and acceptance of the food supply
by the public. As providers of information to the PAT program, MSU Extension agents
and specialists are being called on to provide information about safe and effective
management techniques. These recommendations require information about pest
identification and life cycles, non-chemical, cultural control methods and they weigh
future agronomic considerations regarding the economic realities of arid crop production.
Chemical control recommendations need to include cost, timeliness, and efficacy of
control, but also legal considerations regarding mammalian toxicity, groundwater
contamination, pest resistance and used container disposal. Pesticide education programs
supplied with information by MSU Extension specialists and staff are unique in
providing a research-based source of pesticide information and application practices for
various pest management situations.
An important part of the information gathered by Extension specialists and staff is
done by the MSU insect, weeds and disease diagnostic labs. A software application, the
Pest Diagnostic Database (PDD), has been developed to log submitted samples,
7
incorporate recommendations, and report making. The database contains over five years
of insect and disease occurrences. The database provides recommendations, which are
continually updated as new information is developed and are dynamic and historically
accurate with respect to problem severity, crop stage, location in state and time of year.
Presently staff delivers information to remote users including pesticide applicators via
phone, mail and computer modem using the MSU Outreach Network. Written sources
(books, Extension fact sheets) are often not updated annually, tend to be more generic.
They do not include localized or very recent information. Recommendations for pest
management are more likely to be updated, especially for local situations, but may not
include detailed information about pest monitoring, life cycle and non-chemical
management strategies. In other words, current information exists; a structure for
delivery does not.
In an effort to solve the problem of delivery, the PDD has been incorporated into
a networking software program, the Pest Recommendation Network (PRN). The PRN
has been deployed on the web at http ://Scarab .msu.montana.edu/PRNI . since March
1998 and allows remote users access via Web browsers. Users can access PDD
information and apply it to their situation by a method of data organization called Case-
based Reasoning. Recommendations in a cased-based format can also be linked or
integrated across subject areas. The resulting recommendations are integrated based
among subject areas accessed. Users of the database are presented with a ranking of
situations or solutions similar to theirs. The user obtains a list of possible management
options, implications for potential pesticide hazards, safety aspects and environmental
8
concerns. The PRN integrates pest management expertise of Extension agents,
consultants, and specialists with pest information and seasonal occurrence from the
Insect and Disease Diagnostic Lab database.
Users of the PRN are presented with a ranking of Pest situations or solutions
similar to theirs. The resulting PRN compliments pesticide education by providing an
extensive database of localized or regionalist pest occurrence information, incorporating
information about safety and appropriate pesticide use, and improves the ability of the
manager to incorporate safety issues into decision-making.
The gears, a suspicious public worried about their food supply, Agricultural
producers who employ scientific practices to produce food and National and State
governments and Land Grant institutions are in place. What is needed is knowledge
about factors allowing or prohibiting these gears from meshing.
Objectives
The goal of Pesticide Applicator Training (PAT) is to deliver research based
information about pest control to participants who produce a nutritious food supply. This
study was conducted to evaluate the factors affecting the implementation of an electronic
pest recommendation network (PRN) for PAT in Montana. The findings reported in this
paper were determined using a pre-survey, training, control and post-survey of a portion
of the population. Participants in the study were pesticide applicators (n = 497) in
Montana PAT Region 2 (Choteau, Teton, Cascade, Toole and Pondera) counties.
9
Participants were randomly assigned to one or two groups: trained or control. The intent
of this study was to determine the following:
(1)
IfPesticide Applicator training (PAT) influences a participants level of PRN use;
(2)
If lack of hardware, software, monthly service provider charges, familiarity with
what the WWW offers, lack of computer technical assistance or training and/or
high telephone line charges influence if a participant uses the PRN; and.
(3)
If the relative value of the following topics were a factor in PRN use:
(a)
Crop variety susceptibility information
(b)
Conditions favoring susceptibility
(c)
Symptoms and look alike symptoms
(d)
Economic thresholds
(e)
Pest life cycle
(f)
Knowing required scouting frequency
(g)
Typical infestation pattern in fields
(h)
Cultural control information
(i)
Chemical control information
Assumptions
The assumptions for this study were:
(1)
Producers want useful pesticide application and hazard information.
(2)
Useful pesticide application and hazard information exists to distribute to
Montana producers.
10
(3)
A time lag exists between when the pesticide information is published in a useful
format and when it reaches the producer in a useful format.
(4) • Pesticide applicators who answer questions regarding the usefulness of
recommendation previously supplied via the PRN then they are incorporating
information into the daily decision making process.
(5)
' (6)
(7)
Pesticide applicator who owned computer hardware also knew how to use it.
The factors affecting the use of Distance Education technology by college
students would also affect PRN use by growers.
Producers did not know that the PRN exists.
Limitations
The population for the study was limited to 1757 Montana residents who
participated in Pesticide certification and re-certification programs in PAT Region 2
(Choteau, Teton, Cascade, Toole and Pondera counties). This group of producers was
meant to serve as a sample, and considering limits to external and internal validity, allow
inferences to other PAT regions. The collection of data was to be completed within two
PAT training seasons.
Definition of Terms
The following definitions are for terms contained in this study:
Distance Education (DE) The separation of teacher and learner during at least a majority
of the instructional process. The influence of an educational organization,
including the provision of student evaluation. The use of educational media to
unite teacher and learner and carry course content. The provision of two-way
11
communication between teacher, tutor, or educational agency and learner
(Verduih and Clark 1991, p. 11)
Pesticide Recommendation Network (PRN) Computer software that allows the user to
access the Pest Diagnostic Database of recommendations in a Case-based
Reasoning format and use the information in pest management decision making.
Pesticide Applicator Training (PAT) Statewide delivery of National Pesticide use and
safety information.
Case-based Reasoning fCBRi A method of reasoning that solves new problems by
adapting solutions that were used to solve old problems.
12
. CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This literature review focuses on the adoption of computer technology, adult and
distance education applicable to the Montana Pesticide Applicator Training (PAT). A
definition, brief history, and underlying principles (types, delivery, evaluation) of each
are included.
Androgogy and PAT
Androgogy is the mechanism of adult learning, the conditions for effecting a
permanent change in an adults behavior (Zemke and Zemke, 1981). When conditions
warrant (career changes, birth, marriage, retirement etc) adults seek out and demand
learning experiences. Ideally, androgogy is the facilitation of this experience. Adult
educators encourage an adults’ natural motivation to leam. This is especially true when
the adult believes they need to leam. Educating adults who are not instinctively
motivated to leam requires outside motivation and incentives. So confronted with the
impossibility of ordering adults into a classroom, prodding them into seats and forcing
them to leam, USDA funded educators, especially those dealing with restricted use
agricultural chemicals employ an economic incentive. The incentive is Leam to apply
pesticides (an important component of agricultural profit) according to the label or they
13
will not be available for purchase” (Reeves Petroff, personal communication. Great Falls,
January 2000).
In addition to the lack of motivation, problems with presentation quality and the
perceived relevance of complex scientific information can also confound ideal androgogy
during PAT sessions. Lacefield (1998) suggests a lecture may be the best way to teach
an inexperienced, fresh-behind-the-ears, recent high school graduate and it may also be
the best way to teach an older adult with limited self-directed learning experience. The
PAT audience is a cross section of the agricultural population and it includes “adults in
the first stage of intellectual and ethical development (a group which is not restricted to
the young) see the world in polar terms of right vs. wrong” (Lacefield, 1998, p. 3). If the
presentation does not portray information in “do this” or “do that” terms it may cause
intimidation. Dr. Lacefield (1998) goes on to add that “These students have little
tolerance for gray areas. When faced with uncertainty in a course, these learners will
often perceive the instructor as poorly qualified and this lack of qualification as the
reason for the uncertainty” (p. 3).
Petroff, the PAT coordinator for Montana, observed that two out of 30 PAT
participants might be motivated to learn, the rest are there to receive credit so they can
purchase chemical pesticides necessary for agricultural production and the lack of
motivation to Ieam and apply PAT information professionally results in poorly calibrated
spraying equipment (Reeves Petroff, personal communication, Great Falls, January
2000). Based on continuing problems occurring with pesticide application the portion of
the audience that makes right or wrong decisions may be large. Weaver, a MSU stored
14
grain specialist, agrees and noted the number of instances of misapplied stored grain
fumigants that occur every year (David Weaver, personal communication, Bozeman,
May 2001). Jones (2001) a MSU soil scientist, reports in the Montana Crop Health.
Report that the active ingredient in the herbicide Assert has been detected in groundwater
under the agriculturally productive Fairfield bench. In extreme cases Petroff (2001)
suggested that even deaths occur when chemicals are applied incorrectly.
USDA funded PAT is not the only program employing incentives to motivate
agricultural producers. In Denmark, agricultural units collect detailed data from grower’s
clubs. The economic incentives (bulk discounts) to be a member of a growing club are
large. The data collected from the growers clubs are published in a report. This report
allows comparison of the amount of fuel, pesticides and fertilizers used to grow a unit of
production. Each member knows their own identification number, but not the
identification numbers of the other members. With this type of information exchange it
is easy for a club member to compare the effectiveness of different operations, gauge
trends across the membership and adjust their practices. On the other hand, it is easy for
the administrator to do the same and initiate trends and suggest best management
practices.
Even though, ideal androgogy may not be completely effective at educating a
PAT audience motivated by an economic incentive, androgogical literature does offer
guidelines to discuss factors affecting the implementation of information, like PAT, by
adults. The purpose of this study was to identify what factors could augment or impede
the incorporation of effective use, safety and hazard information via the delivery
15
structure of the PRN, a decision support system. Following are some of the important
androgogical factors applicable to PAT.
Adult Memory in Andrososv
Is adult memory a factor that should be addressed when educating the PAT
audience? Merriam et al. (1991) stated, “That adult intelligence appears relatively stable,
at least until the sixth or seventh decade” (p. 158). It seems that adults can remember and
that a more important consideration is how the information to be remembered is
structured. Lacefield (1998) says that “accommodating changes occurring in adult
memory and experiences requires consideration, especially when adults are faced with
meaningless learning, learning that involves reassessment of old knowledge, and pure
memorization” (p. I). Dixon (1994) said that “the more ways a meaningful structure is
connected to our existing knowledge, the more likely we will be able to retrieve it” (p.
16). Literature addressing the implications of adult memory frequently include terms
suggesting that information structured in away that connects or relates the information to
previous knowledge and experience will be most successful.
Course Design and Androgogy
After memory considerations Knowles (1980) believed, that a second factor is
designing courses that include information that allows the adult to apply their
experiences to problems rather than subjects and these problems should reflect the
concerns that adults have experienced or foresaw. So in order to design the course
16
around the concerns of the student it is important to identify the motivation of the adult
student. In other words, if adults want information to help them find a new job, an
effective course design would include problems requiring job hunting tactics and
strategies. Often, individual learners each have a myriad of reasons for attending courses
which makes identification of concerns more difficult. Lacefield (1998) suggested that a
learner may be motivated by the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Intention of using the knowledge or skill for a particular job or
completion of a particular task;
Imparting the knowledge and skill in order to teach or share it with
others who plan to use the skill;
Future understanding or learning in order to understand something
which has not yet occurred;
Pleasure and self-esteem from possession of a skill or knowledge.
Learning for credit and not because the skill is important to the
learner (p. 3).
Another attempt to define types of motivation categorization by Houle (Merriam,
1991 et al.) separates the motivations of learners into three types generalized to
encompass the diversity. These are:
1.
2.
3.
Goal-oriented learners who use education as a means to an ends;
Activity-oriented learners who participate for the sake of the social
interaction;
Learning-oriented learners who seek knowledge for knowledge's
sake (p. 83).
Knowing the motivation of the participants will allow their concerns to be
identified. Addressing these concerns leads to effective course design and content. If
motivation and level of concern of the participants are lacking what can be done?
17
Course Structure and Androgogv
Historically PAT programs bring training to community centers. The training
structure uses lecture as the important activity. While this is a practical activity, there are
problems, when lecturing to adults, especially adults whose motivation and concerns do
not lend itself to learning. Brookfield (1992) has found;
“that these learners often complain that facilitators are abdicating their
role by forcing learners to take responsibility and make judgments they
are not equipped to make. Instead of being pleased about opportunities to
form their own opinions and judgments, they may be confused and
intimidated by this reversal of their expectations about education” (p. 13).
Experience has identified that a level of motivation below what is required by the
course or lecture increases participant intimidation. Motivation and the concerns of the
participants is a factor in the acceptance of PAT information. Concerns about pesticides
are low and participants only have a certain amount of time and energy to expend
learning about pesticides before they see the effort as impractical. Much of this
motivation is expended traveling to the session. So changing the structure (less
intimidating) and delivery (less travel) the motivation required to participate in the course
could be applied, more effectively, to learning PAT.
A typical PAT lecture attempts to address the motivation levels of all participants
at once. Thus a participant who is more motivated to Ieam is forced to attend for the
same period as a participant who is less motivated, increasing the chances that at some
time the effort expended will be perceived as impractical by sqme of the participants.
18
Following is a discussion of what type of computer systems might be structured
to deliver PAT information to a audience with diverse levels of motivation. However,
before investigating how to structure a course addressing multiple levels, the problems of
delivery to users who are removed from the teacher in time and space should be
discussed. This literature review will now present information about Distance Education
and PAT.
Distance Education Defined
The advent of technology brought attention to the possibility of education in
situations where the teacher and student are at a distance. It is interesting and
informative to see how the definition evolved from the inception to the present. The first
attempt in English to define distance education and to articulate a theory appeared in
1972 and in 1980 was named by Moore as the theory of transactional distance. In a
reflective editorial Moore (1991) said,
“It is a distance of understandings and perceptions, caused in part by the
geographic distance, that has to be overcome by teachers, learners and
educational organizations if effective, deliberate, planned learning is to
occur (p. I).
Another version of this definition made by Verduin and Clark in 1986
acknowledged the use of computers and audio video equipment to unite teacher and
learner. It also suggested that two way communication distinguishes distance education
from other uses of technology in education. Finally, this version placed emphasis on the
separation of teacher and learner during at least a majority of the instructional process.
19
Almost 14 years later, Rossman (2000) further defined distance education as
follows:
“Distance education is planned learning that normally occurs in a different
place from teaching and as a result requires special techniques of course
design, special instructional techniques, special methods of
communication by electronic and other technology, as well as special
organizational and administrative arrangements” (p. I).
Distance Education History
Organized mail delivery in Britain allowed the first distance education efforts,
and Verduin and Clark (1991) believe that, “The History of education at a distance may
have started with a course in shorthand. Isaac Pitman used the British Penny post system
to receive Bible passages his students had copied in shorthand. This course was the first
to include formal grading” (p. 15).
This type of correspondence course has dominated the distance education scene
from 1880's to present and most distance education in this form occurs through
organizations other than colleges or universities. The Distance Education and Training
Council (DETC), formerly the National Home Study Council, estimates that today more
than 2.5 million Americans are enrolled in DETC-accredited institutions (DETC, 2001).
It is estimated that since 1890, some 130 million Americans have taken distance
study/correspondence courses. Other applications are emerging and prospering,
especially in colleges and universities.
20
Distance Education Tvoes
Paulsen (1995) categorizes Distance Education types into predominant
communication paradigms: (I.) One-alone: Online Resources Paradigm which is a model
in which the student is a self-directed learner, often only interacting with online resources
like online databases, journals, interest groups, and interviews. These activities will tend
to be heavily structured but they require minimal interactivity, on the part of the
instructor; (2.) One-to-One: the Email Paradigm: Email instructional methods are
characterized by individual and individualized instruction and learning. Often these
techniques (learning contracts, apprenticeships, correspondence studies) rely heavily on
the personal relationship between the student and the teacher; (3.) One-to-Many: the
Bulletin Board Paradigm a model in which the students are exposed to one or more
experts in a given subject area. Usually these methods (lectures, symposia, skits) imply
passivity on the part of the learner; (4.) Many-to-Many techniques: the Conferencing
Paradigm is a technique "that all participants have the opportunity to take part in the
interaction (discussion groups, debates, simulations, case studies, role plays,
brainstorming, group projects).
However, it is important to realize that new technology may for the short term
seem like new methods of distance education. Often the new methods are merely media
developments and “Although the introduction of a new media system usually brings with
it a novelty effect...media are mere vehicles that deliver instruction but do not influence
21
student achievement any more than the track that delivers our groceries causes changes
in nutrition” (Verduin and Clark, 1991, p. 11).
The introduction of new technology will continue. Currently, the best example is
the World Wide Web (WWW). On one hand, novelty is high and content is lacking in
many of the home pages. On the other, it has taken the Library of Congress over a
hundred years to collect 14 million books and catalogue them. The WWW collected ten
million documents, cataloged them and made them available without respect to physical
location in less than five years.
Distance Education and PAT in Montana
Previous to the discussion of distance education, was a discussion of how low
levels of motivation and concern increase the possibility of intimidation and cause the
information to be deemed impractical. A PAT participants motivation is low and so are
their concerns, making it hard to develop effective programs. Currently a PAT
participant’s motivation must equal or exceed the effort, outlined below, required for re­
certification. To become certified an applicator has two options:
I) Attend an approved 6 hour initial pesticide training program AMD
complete an Initial Quiz at the end of the session. The PAT coordinator
should go over the quiz with individuals that answered less than 70% of
the questions correctly. OR 2) Complete an open book Private
Applicators Certification Exam (Exams I or 2) and answer at least 70% of
the questions correctly. Note that Initial Quizzes are different from
Certifying Exams!
Once an individual has received their private pesticide license they are
termed as re-certifying applicators. In order to be eligible to renew their
farm licenses for another 5 year cycle, re-certifying applicators must
either:
22
Accrue 6 pesticide re-certification credits (points) over the course of the 5
year re-certification cycle for their district; OR Take a closed book Exam
(Exam 3) during the re-certification year (5th year) and answer 70% of the
questions correctly. The accrual of the 6 points does not need to take
place all in the re-certification year, but can be spread out over the 5 year
period (Montana Pesticide Education Program, 2001 p. I).
Early in 1998 online quizzes were made available in an attempt to match course
structure to the motivational level of a Montanan seeking to accrue pesticide re­
certification credits. By completing a Web quiz either in the home or County Extension
office a participant can decrease the price of attending a presentation. It is unknown if
the quizzes reduce intimidation or increase the acceptance of PAT information. It is
known that the quizzes are becoming more popular. The quizzes were made available
late in 1998. From August 1998 - January 2000, two quizzes were completed. From
2000 - 2001, 38 quizzes were completed by Montana PAT participants.
Would PAT participation become more effective if the PRN could be used to
deliver complete PAT training required for certification requirements? The Case-based
reasoning structure of the PRN matches user input (describing past experiences) to
database information and develops a checklist of possible solutions. Unlike a lecture,
user input or motivation to find an answer drives the Case-based reasoning to a solution.
The PRN can be delivered to the users workplace or home and so what motivation is
available is applied to getting an answer and not to, for example, travel. To Ieam more
about factors affecting the acceptance of software like the PRN the following literature
was reviewed.
23
Factors affecting Adoption of Computer Software or Decision S upport System s in
Agriculture
PAT structure that does not intimidate and can be delivered to the participant for
completion, at their discretion, of PAT certification should consider the following. As
Lacefield (1998) and others suggest, that while we want to move our students toward
independence and ability to direct their learning, we must be aware that not all will
embrace the opportunity. In the early stages of this process, many will struggle,
complain, and be very uncomfortable. Facilitation should be balanced with structure.
We should aim to be a guide on the side but we may want to avoid requiring students to
blaze their own trails.
If structure appropriate to a PAT participants concerns would help those confused
and intimidated with the gray areas of complex scientific practices, might computer
software deliver such structure? Could intimidation be reduced and participant
motivation applied more effectively using software delivered on the WWW? Many Land
Grant Universities believe this to be a possibility and are developing a type of computer
software named Decision Support software. Literature delving into the “why” of
computer adoption and decision support software is considered next.
In a recent study of the adoption of computers and the software that runs on them, .
producer age and innovative behavior was studied. It is believed that younger producers
adopt computers to make up for lack of experience. Ascough, et al. (1999), found that:
“non-adoption of computers among farmers can be explained as a rational decision. It
appears that computers are being adopted more frequently by less experienced producers
24
to compensate for lack of experience” (p. 203).
Another factor affecting adoption of computer technology is innovative behavior.
Five categories describe innovative behavior. They are adopters; innovators; early
adopters; early majority; late majority; and laggards. Lewis (1998) says, “Adopter
category groups tend to be normally distributed and on average there are: 2.5%
innovators; 1.3% early adopters; 34% early majority; 34% late majority; and 16%
laggards” (p. 234).
In summary, the literature review above suggests computing will be adopted by
younger producers at a rate determined by their adopter category and that the average
audience includes persons from each category. As this literature review progresses it
seems to be increasingly apparent that addressing a diverse audience could improve
effectiveness of PAT.
Decision Support Systems
If structured PAT computer software addressing varied levels of motivation and
innovative behavior could improve implementation of PAT, what kind of software tool
would work? Decision support systems are models developed to improve the decision­
making process or in other words decrease the grey area of decision making inherent in
complex scientific information. First, a discussion of the basic idea behind decision
support systems or models. Attonaty et al. (1999) believes that, models are considered as
“only a means to an end, which is to have a well structured and coherent debate about a
problematical situation in order to decide how to improve it” (p. 42). He adds that
25
“Deliberate strategies” combine with “emergent strategies” to produce “realized
strategies.” Deliberate strategy refers to a project formulated in a stable, foreseeable or
controllable environment. Emergent strategy refers to a strategy learned from action
experience. Attonaty et al. (1999) stresses that trials and failures, experiments and
apprenticeship are part of the process.
Several successful efforts have been detailed that have utilized Case-based
reasoning, an artificial intelligence approach, to problem solving. Schank and Leake
(1998), from the Artificial Intelligence Project, Yale University, said that:
“When people encounter new situations, they often explain them by
remembering old explanations, and adapting them to fit. We believe that
this case-based approach to explanation holds promise for use in Al
systems, both for routine explanation and to creatively explain situations
quite unlike what the system has encountered before” (p. I).
Decision support systems using Case-based reasoning projects, other than the
MSU PRN, have been developed by Land Grant Universities. At Virginia Tech
University, CFACTOR (A Case-based Reasoning Approach to Evaluating Crop
Rotations) is a program to evaluate crop rotations for the risks associated with soil
erosion and pesticide pollution in a farming system. The applicability of a case-based
reasoning approach has been developed to solve agronomic and entomological problems
including erosion and pesticide-free pest management. Indiscriminate land use promotes
erosion that leads to severe problems in the future. Crop rotation is one of the several
approaches to contain erosion losses and offers mitigation of some crop pests. Some
crop rotations may result in negative impacts on the environment. The pesticide
pollution risk of a crop rotation is evaluated based on suitability of the rotation as a pest
26
management practice and on evaluating criteria like possible pest outbreaks in a rotation,
the available control options and the environmental risks associated with these control
options (Virginia Tech University, 2001).
A University of Wyoming project, CAJRMA, produces advice about the most
economical responses to Wyoming grasshopper infestations. CAKMA does this by
predicting the proportion of available forage that will be consumed by grasshoppers and
estimating the economic returns of various treatment options. The information required
to make the forage loss prediction includes the date, the infestation location on a
Wyoming map, the range value and infestation history of the location, the number of
grasshoppers per square yard, the grasshopper type and age distribution, the relative
recent precipitation and temperatures, and the total area infested, including adjacent
neighbors' lands (Hastings, 1996).
Possible Methods for Increasing Adoption of Computers by Montana Producers
Research into adoption suggests that maybe PAT is not accessing potential
partners in the adoption process. Attonaty, Chatelin and Garcia, (1999) looked at
adoption of computers by producers early in there use for farm management and found
that consultants who had knowledge of computers played, an important role in guiding the
producer, who had knowledge of farming goals to useful solutions.
How decision support software delivered over distance could act as a means to
amplify interaction is expressed by Attonaty et. al. (1999).
27
“The farmers reconsidered the use of the optimization tool in various ways
not predicable at the beginning. They agreed on the process of building
generic patterns as a means to increase their intelligence of possible
solutions. To design their own solution, they adopted an iterative and
incremental attitude to attain a satisfying solution and they use the
optimization tool as a what-if calculator. In fact, despite the lack of
interactivity in computer terms, the tool proved it interactive in that it
encouraged the different people involved in the process to make a
dialogue, to ask questions, and to re-assess their ideas” (p. 159).
Interaction about specific problems using selected variables agreed upon by those
involved is probably the most valuable aspect of decision support or modeling projects.
Decision support systems like the PRN rarely supply the exact right answer, what they do
is to allow the concerned user to address what is important, discard what is not and arrive
at a well informed decision. In addition, allowing low risk “what i f ’ opportunities to
participants during and after the formal discussion allows those requiring clarification or
interested in other facets of the problem to return or delve deeper into the problem and
solution to their satisfaction creates an valuable learning tool. The model coordinates
opinions, experience and expertise for problem solving. Applying this process to the
PAT problem, would accommodate different levels of participant motivation and
concern.
Changing Agriculture and Changing Extension
The term agriculture suggests research, engineering, banking and education, it no
longer means just farming. Information about agriculture is becoming more and more
important. Concerns about agriculture and its impact on society are driving public
perceptions and competition for resources.
28
The Smith-Lever Act, 1914, act helped define the beginning of federal efforts in
agricultural education. Since this beginning change and innovation has been a inevitable
burden. The alarm for change and innovation has often been delivered by a reduction or
lack of increase in public funding and is causing Extension systems in many states to
consider program restructuring. Extension administrators and personnel are examining
program content to ensure that critical needs are being met.
Besides changes, discussed previously, in consumer perception of agriculture, life in
agricultural communities is being reassessed by those living it. A child and family
development specialist, DeBord (1991) says that,
“Family farms, typically associated with rural areas, no longer support
immediate or extended family members. Farms are being sold, women
are taking more lucrative positions, and community service agencies are
realizing the need to change traditional programming methods to meet the
needs of traditional rural clientele” (p. I).
Changes in how those in agriculture value their quality of life will affect the motivation
to continue living with agriculture and the practicality of PAT.
Agriculture and Pesticides
Pesticides are very important to production agriculture and a study cited in a
Hudson Institute paper by Avery (1996) suggests just how important:
“yield in crops would drop between 24 percent and 57 percent without
pesticides. Wheat yields would be harmed the least, at 24 percent, and
com yields would be cut by 32 percent and rice by 57 percent. One study
on fruit and vegetable production concluded that yields would drop from
between 50 percent and nearly 100 percent depending on the crop and
location. Another study concluded that fruit and vegetables consumption
29
would decrease by 11 percent because of high prices and that acreage
required for production would increase by 44 percent” (p. 10).
The value of pesticides to agriculture can be discovered, as many a gardener
knows, with very little first hand experience.
Extension Pesticide Applicator Training: History and Mission
The safe use of pesticides has been a major focus of Cooperative Extension
Service (CES) programs since 1960. Concerns about pesticide use and effects on the
environment prompted Extension to formalize its educational programs on pesticides,
based on this need, and the concern for the health of those who use pesticides, including
homeowners and commercial applicators, as well as farmers and ranchers.
The Pesticide Applicator Training (PAT) program was begun in the mid 1970's,
in order to train applicators in the safe use of restricted use pesticides. On an annual
basis, Extension trains over 500,000 pesticide applicators (USDA, 1995). CES also
provides pesticide education to a diverse audience, ranging from rural to urban settings,
hi 1994, “CES reported making almost 4 million contacts via training programs,
educational displays, news articles, radio and TV and one-on-one communication”
(USDA, 1995, p. I). Topics such as homeowner use, proper storage and disposal, ground
and surface water concerns, endangered species, worker protection, food safety,
integrated pest management and risk/use reduction are covered.
The Pesticide Applicator Training program provides educational opportunities
and information to people who use pesticides as part of their livelihood, to consumers
30
with questions about the use and impact of pesticides in their everyday lives, to students
at Montana State University and at other institutions, and to decision-makers such as
local, state and federal government regulators and legislators.
Our mission is to improve pesticide use practices to protect humans and
the environment by providing information on IPM concepts, pesticide use
data, laws and regulations, and environmental stewardship leading to a
sound understanding of pesticides and their responsible use.
The philosophy is that PAT is in the business of pesticide education to
teach people to:
(a) evaluate when pesticides are needed
(b) apply pesticides safely
(c) understand the impact of pesticide use
(d) know and understand the impact of pesticide-related laws
and regulations” (Montana PAT Program, 2001, p. I).
' Pesticide applicators have improved their knowledge and attitudes about
materials. In 1994, there were 292,613 private applicators in training programs designed
for certification as users of restricted use pesticides. This represented an increase of over
20,000 applicators over 1993. There were also 215,885 commercial applicators that were
trained during 1994, an increase of several thousands since 1993. Almost 4 million
individuals took part in educational programs on pesticide safety. There were 206,755
pesticide applicator trainees who adopted improved pesticide use practices as a result of
PAT in 1994 (USDA, 1995).
Major PAT Accomplishments and Highlights
It is hard to quantify the contribution of PAT to the quality of the food supply, it
is easier to judge the programs contribution based on the results of scientific research. If
we use risk as a guideline, food scientists rate the risk to our health from pesticide
residues less than the risks associated with microbial contamination, nutritional
imbalance, environmental contaminants and naturally occurring toxicants. Many other
activities are considered riskier than consuming food.
32
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
This section describes the procedures used in completing this study. Included is a
description of the design and rational of the study, population, how the population was
sampled, a description of the study instruments, and the methods by which data were
collected and analyzed.
Rationale for Research Design
The design for this study was a pre-survey of the entire sample and post survey of
the portion of the sample who accessed the Pest Recommendation Network (PRN).
Included in the design was an opportunity to explore the effect that training had on
Montana pesticide applicators use and application of the WWW resources.
Design of the Study
The objectives of this study were to determine the factors that may enhance or
prohibit use of the PRN by pesticide applicators. To this end, the design for this study
used a pre-survey (S), training (RT), control (RControl) groups determined at random
and post survey of those trained participants who accessed the PRN (PRN S).
S________ RTrain
RControl
PRN S
33
In addition to the “Survey of Pesticide Applicators accessing the Web” (S and
PRN S), both trained (RT) and control (RControl) groups received the take-home
worksheet (Appendix C) that provided step by step instructions on how to access and
receive information from the PRN. In addition to the worksheet, training (RTrain)
included verbal explanation of 11 Power Point text slides and 3 PRN software screen
images, screen #1, screen #2 and results screen from the PRN application (Appendix D).
The purpose of the mini-lecture and slides were to motivate and familiarize subjects to
the use of the PRN. The control (RControl) saw only one text slide (Appendix E)
referring to the PRN. To use the PRN the control group had to rely on the worksheet
instructions.
The major dependent variable of this study was the number of each group (RTrain
or RControl) that would access the PRN in the future. The moderator variables were
applicator type (Private, Commercial, Restricted), Career type (Producer, Certified Crop
Advisor, County Agent, Agricultural business), lack of hardware, software and/or high
telephone line charges, service provider charges, lack of computer technical assistance or
training, and familiarity with what the WWW offers. The perceived value by the PRN
user of: crop variety susceptibility information, conditions favoring susceptibility,
symptoms and look alike symptoms, economic thresholds, pest life cycle, knowing
required scouting frequency, typical infestation pattern in fields, cultural control
information, chemical control information. The independent variable was amount of
PRN training received.
34
Threats to Intemal Validity
Gall et al. (1996) discuss eight threats to the internal validity of designs with
control groups that were identified by Stanley and Campell in 1963. These threats are:
history, maturation, testing, instrumentation, regression, selection, mortality and
interaction effects.
Over time activities unrelated to the experiment may affect the performance of
the dependant variable. These activities are regarded as history. The public is
experiencing a rapid increase in awareness of the WWW and this could have affected the
results of this survey. A control group was used to help gauge the effects of history and
aid in the identification of the reason survey participants accessed the PKN.
Threat of maturation refers to changes, mental or physical that occur over time to
the subjects. So, if the duration of the study occurs over a long period of time as this
survey did (greater than I year but less than 2 years) other reasons and factors could
affect the use of the PRN other than the amount of training received by each group. A
control group and randomization should have controlled this threat to internal validity.
Intemal validity is also threatened by surveying. Often the survey itself forces the
subjects to organize their thoughts or perceptions and epiphanies may occur. This mental
and emotional development may cause the subject to enter different answers on the post
survey. The reason for the different answers may not be related to the training. The
topics on the survey were only slightly related to the PRN subject matter and a control
group, like the untrained group, has proven a good method to account for the threat of
35
testing.
All data were entered and sorted using MS Access and Excel software. The SPSS
Base 10 statistical package was used to analyze the data. Reliability of the instrument
was determined to be significant at the Alpha = .9040 (Section I) and Alpha = .8837
(Section 2) level using the CronbacITs Alpha statistical method. This reliability test
measures a lower bound indicating the true reliability of the survey. It measures the
amount of variability that is a result of the participants opinions rather than a confusing
survey design.
Statistical regression occurs whenever a test-retest procedure is used to assess
change as an effect of the experimental treatment, there is the possibility that statistical
regression accounts for observed gains in learning (Gall et al., 1996). The design of this
survey did not include testing, which reduces the possibility that this threat affected the
dependant variable. Survey results from both groups were compared using a MannWhitney, Wilcoxon and Freidman (for Likert-type scale questions) comparison tests
useful for non-randomized populations. No statistical difference was evident between
the control or trained group so it is unlikely that statistical regression affected internal
validity.
Differential selection of subjects usually occurs when already formed groups are
used. Thus, the groups may be different before the study began. The survey was
administered on two different days to people who needed credits to meet the 5 year cycle
certification requirements. There were no indications of any factor(s) like poor weather
or other meetings that might have prevented a representative portion of the population
36
from attending either session. Survey results from both groups were compared using a
Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon, and Freidman (for Likert scale questions) comparison
tests useful for nonrandomized populations. No statistical difference was evident
between the two session days so it is unlikely that statistical regression would affect
generalization to the Region 2 PAT population.
Mortality or attrition refers to subjects who drop out of a study due to illness, or
resentment that the treatment is demanding or threatening. Those subjects who drop out
of a study may possess characteristics such that their absence has a significant effect on
the results. If this attrition was not similar across treatments it might have inflated the
percentage of people accessing the PRN.
The last threat to internal validity is selection-maturation interaction. This broad
category refers to the situation where one group, possibly the group receiving the
training, is more mature in a given area than another group. If for some reason a more
mature group attended a session on one day than the other this could have affected the
dependant variable.
Threats to Population Validity
Population, validity concerns the extent to which the results of an experiment can
be generalized from the sample that was studied to a specified, larger group. Gall et al.
(1996) discuss threats distinguished by Bracht and Glass in 1968 to population validity.
The threats to population validity that are applicable to this study are: selection-treatment
interaction, specificity of variables, experimental effects, and reactive arrangements.
37
Selection-treatment interaction occurs when subjects are not randomly selected,
reducing the ability of the results to accurately predict characteristics of the population.
Randomization was not used to select the subjects for this survey, so the survey has good
internal validity, and could be generalized to the Region 2 PAT population. On the other
hand generalizations made to the entire Montana PAT population would be weak. The
nonparametric statistical tests, Mann-Whitney and Freidman, were used since they do not
assume that the population is normally distributed (SPSS, 1999).
Specificity of the variables or when the post survey is administered also threatens
the population validity of the results. The major factor that could have threatened the
results was the threat of time measurement and treatment effect. It was the PAT
participants decision to take the post session survey and this decision could have been
made as much as a year past the survey date. In addition, during the growing season
priorities may change and information valuable at one time may not be valuable at
another. The particular period in the growing season might allow the subject to assess
the PRN, a new source of information, when during another it may not be feasible and
the participant may access historical sources of pest information.
Experimental effects could have affected the response of the subjects and resulted
in less external validity. Any passive elements (age, race, anxiety), active bias, and
evaluation bias that the researcher exhibited during the research process could have
affected the subjects responses. These experimental effects could have affected the
number of the subjects that accessed the PRN since the researcher developing the PRN
was also the lecturer.
38
An important threat to external validity are reactive arrangements. This threat
refers to a number of factors associated with the way a study is conducted and the
feelings and attitudes of the subjects involved. In other words the Hawthorne effect may
have affected results of the survey. Neither the trained group or the control group knew
they were receiving a different lecture so the Hawthorne effect would not have affected
the number of participants who accessed the PRN. On the other hand, mandated
Government training like PAT is very often perceived as a chore or unnecessary
infringement on the subjects life. So a participant, who might have been interested if
information about the PRN had been delivered by the “Paul Harvey” radio message, or
“early adopter neighbor” may have paid less attention because of the mandate. It is
possible that the participants may also have been affected by a lecture suggesting they
would have to make decisions using technology. Learners without a recent history of
education often complain that facilitators are abdicating their role by forcing learners to
take responsibility and make judgments they are not equipped to make. Instead of being
pleased about opportunities to form their own opinions and judgments, they may be
confused and intimidated by this reversal of their expectations about education
(Brookfield ,1992).
Sensitization or awareness of the surveyed issues may cause a subject to react
differently since they are suddenly aware of the problem. This threat could be a factor as
subjects may develop a negative reaction to supplying a third party, especially local and
federal governments, with information about how they make decisions, or that they do
39
not use computers when it is popular to do so. Historically and currently prevalent in
Montana is a ground swell of mistrust directed at the government (Stem, 1996).
Population Description
Approximately 8,000 private pesticide applicators are licensed in Montana. For
re-certification purposes, the state is divided into 5 regions with rotating programs
offered among region to obtain credits necessary for license renewal. In addition, many
applicators become new licensees each year either by attending an Extension Service'
sponsored pesticide-training program or through a self-study program available at county
Extension office.
A private applicator may be certified in one of two ways:
"I. Obtain at least six credits of approved training over a five-year period.
This training can be obtained during the five-year re-certification period
or all in the last year of re-certification. It is recommended that
applicators have the opportunity to obtain some training in each of the five
years during the re-certification period.
2. Re-certification requirements may change to 12 credits with some
training occurring during each year.
OR
3. If six credits are not obtained by the end of the fifth year and the
applicator wishes to re-certify, he/she must take a closed book written
exam and answer 70% or more of the questions correctly. The applicator
cannot enter the system as an initial certified applicator for a period of two
years from the date of re-certification” (Montana Pesticide Education
Program 2001, [Online]).
Sample and Time Line Description
In 1997, the PRN project received USDA funding to develop an electronic pest
recommendation network for pesticide applicators in Montana. Grant objective I,
40
programing of the software application and Grant objective 2, development of the initial
case information was also completed in 1998. On the other hand, delivery of training
allowing PAT participants to use the WWW based PKN, proved difficult because the
Montana 1998 - 1999 PAT training was underway in Western Montana or Region I. The
PRN contains cases that reflect situations common to small grain pest management.
However, Western Montana or Region I includes very little small grain production.
Therefore, delivery of PRN training to PAT workshops in Region I would have been
ineffective. In 1999 - 2000, PAT was underway in Region 2, an area that contains
suitable small grain production. Small grain producers were likely to find the cases in
the PRN useful and so the study was scheduled for delivery to PAT workshops in Region
2 during the 2000 season.
Results of Survey Instrument Testing
To improve the over all design, return rate, validity, and readability, the survey
was pilot tested by faculty in the Education Department, and during the Gallatin and
Granite Counties Pesticide Applicator re-certification session in December 1999.
Seventy four participants (possible 220) were surveyed in the instrument test.
The results of survey section II indicated that greater than 50% of the participants
have or lease a computer or Web TV, have access to email, and access to the Web or the
Internet. Survey Section m asked the participant what factors affected their use of the
Internet. Familiarity with what the WWW offers ranked as having the most effect on the
participants use of the WWW, followed by lack of technical assistance or training.
41
Telephone and monthly telephone charges ranked last. In order to align the format and
structure of information included in the PRN the survey asked participants to rank the
value of selected pest control factors to their pest control decision making. Chemical
control information, pest life cycle, conditions favoring susceptibility and economic
thresholds ranked above typical infestation patterns, cultural control information,
symptoms and look alike symptoms. These results served to support the assumption that
producers had access to computers and the Internet.
Following the survey test, the instrument was discussed with advisors and people
experienced with conducting surveys and portions were revised where necessary.
Following the testing and revision process the instrument was approved .
Using the tested instrument, 540 pesticide applicators were surveyed from a
Region 2 population of approximately 1757. Forty three surveys were discarded so in the
study, the total sample was made up of 497 new and returning pesticide applicators
attending the 2000 Region 2 PAT re-certification session in Great Falls, Montana. No
attempt was made to determine gender or minority.
Table I. Frequency of PAT participants responding to pre-training paper survey.
County
Area Total
Region 2 survey
1700
* 43 surveys were incomplete and discarded.
Attendees
540
Surveys
Returned
Completed*
540
497
Participants were asked to circle terms (Private, Commercial or Restricted) that
described their PAT Applicator type most accurately. The PAT session was designed
42
and advertised as suitable for private applicators and the data in Tables I and 2 indicated
that the private applicator (437) and producers (413) were a large majority of attendees.
Table 2. Types of Pesticide Applicators Participating in Survey.___________
Applicator Type
Number
%
Private Applicators
437
88
New Applicators
40
.08
Restricted
10
.02
Commercial
6
.01
Private and Commercial
4
.008
Number
%
413
83
Agricultural Business
16
3
Both a Producer and Ag. Business
16
3
Certified Crop Advisor
I
.1
51.
10
Table 3. Types of Careers Participating in Survey.
Career Type
Producers
Career type not indicated
Similarity of the Samples
To determine if the control and trained groups were from the same population a
Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon Test was applied using the SPSS Base 10.0 package.
Differences in the two groups were not significant at .05 (except for Variable 4
“Economic pest control thresholds” in Section I), so the groups were treated as similar.
43
Instrument Design: Pre-session Survey on Paper
A list of factors that might affect a pesticide applicator’s decision to use
electronic methods to access PRN5-Were collected and identified from the literature, and
through conversations with agricultural educators and researchers in the Department of
Agricultural and Technology Education. A Likert-type scale, employing responses
ranging from zero (0) to eight (8) for section I (Pest Control Information Needs) and zero
(0) to five (5), with a “Not applicable” option (Factors Influencing Your Current use of
the World Wide Web Network). A zero indicated that a factor had no Pest Control value
to the participant or effect on a PAT participants use of the PRN. Eight to five indicated
that the factor had high value for pest control or a “strong effect” on the PAT participants
use of the PRN.
The survey instrument consisted of different sections (Appendix A). The first
section asked questions to determine the value of pest control factors in the PAT
participants pest control decision-making. For this section, the “Not Applicable”
response was not included. This approach forced respondents to make a decision
regarding the potential impact of each factor on the future implementation of PRN
information in pest management decisions.
The second section (Internet Access) asked participants about what kind of
computer resources they had and the third section (Factors Influencing Your Current Use
of the World Wide Web) contained questions about the value of selected factors that may
44
affect their decision to use the WWW in day to day activities. The fourth (IV) and final
section contained questions about demographic data. •
Instead of a mailed survey, convincing cover letter, and postcard reminders an
opportunity was identified during which the survey could be administered to a large
captive audience. PAT sessions have evolved in many counties from many small
meetings throughout the season to one or two large meetings on different dates. In the
large meeting situation a suitable date and central location that has auditorium facilities
are chosen. Notices are sent out to all persons requiring PAT recertification. Two large
meetings were planned for Region 2 (Choteau, Teton, Cascade, Toole and Pondera)
counties. The attendees of two large meetings were given the pre-test survey instrument
(Appendix A), one of the meetings, chosen at random, received PRN training slides and
lecture.
Instrument Design: PRN Post Session Survey on the WWW
An on-line feedback survey (Appendix B), for PAT trainees was designed and
implemented. The PRN online survey was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of
PRN training and determine what aspects of the PRN attracted users. This on-line
electronic survey determined if a certified pesticide applicator would incorporate
regionalized pest occurrence, safety and appropriate pesticide use information into
decision-making. In other words, the more a factor is valued the more it would be used
by the participant. This in turn would allow the researcher to design recommendations to
address the factors that are of most value to the user. On the other hand, it would identify
45
those factors important to the correct application of pesticides, but not perceived as
important by the applicators to the correct application of pesticides. Identification of
these factors will allow PAT educators to design information to stress the importance of
factors under-rated by applicators.
Upon accessing the PRN the following three steps are initiated by the PRN. Step
I
requested the user name. If the name was new to the PRN, demographic inform ation
was requested. Step 2 requested information or feedback regarding the users last PRN
session. At this step the returning user can decide to evaluate the results of their last
session or continue to access the database and view recommendations. This opportunity
for the user to enter feedback is repeated at the beginning of each session. If the name
does not match the PRN user list, the new user is asked to fill out the online survey of
Pesticide applicators accessing the web. This new user would then be asked for feedback
at the beginning of their next session. Step 3 allowed a new or returning user to submit
request for pest management information.
Using the reporting abilities of the PRN software, a report of user feedback can be
generated. The report data were then entered into Access and Excel software for analysis
in this study.
46
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS
\
Results of the PAT on PRN access
The “Survey of Pesticide Applicators Accessing the Web” and PRN Training for
Region two (Choteau, Teton, Cascade, Toole and Pondera) counties was completed in
January 1 8 -1 9 , 2000. A tally of the number of participants accessing the PRN was
gathered using the online survey during the 2000 growing season. The results are
displayed in Table 4. Of the 497 persons that completed the PRN training and electronic.
“Survey of Pesticide Applicators Accessing the Web.” Seven first, last and city names
matched the list of participants completing the paper survey administered at the Region 2
PAT re-certification session. In addition, partial electronic information (last name and
city) matched paper survey demographics information. It is difficult to determine where
and how these partial matches received the PRN worksheet. It is possible that the
surveyed Region 2 PAT program attendees passed the PRN worksheet on to a relative
who was perceived as the family computer person.
The data in Table 4 reveal that a possible 150 non survey persons received the
PRN worksheet during the Extension Crop Pest Management Schools. One hundred and
six individual that were not from Region 2 accessed the PRN once during the 2000
47
growing season. None of these 106 persons who accessed the PRN during the 2000
growing season responded to the “Online Feedback Survey”.
Table 4. Differences between those responding to the On-line survey with no PKN
training and those with PRN training.
Possible
PRN
Access
% PRN
Access
Users
Completing
feedback form
Worksheet and PRN Training,
Region 2
273
6
.02
0
Worksheet but no PRN
training, Region 2
243
I
.0004
0
Others who received the
worksheet and training.
150
106
70
0
Training
Results of the Paper
The presentation of the survey results will begin with Section II which describes
the population’s level of Intemet access. Section IH which illustrates the factors
influencing the populations current use of the WWW. Finally, the results of Section I
which asked, “How valuable selected pest control factors are to the surveyed
population’s pest control decision making?”
Rankings of factors were calculated for section I and HI. A Friedman test, in
which the scores for each variable are ranked and the mean ranks of each variable are
compared was applied using the SPSS Base 10.0 package. The Friedman test determines
if there is no difference between the groups, each subject’s rankings would be random
and there would be no difference in the ranks across the variables. Differences in the
48
ratings were statistically significant at .05 (SPSS Asymptotic Significance range was
from - .00 to - .036) so the null hypothesis, that there is no difference in preferences, was
rejected. The results are displayed in Tables 6 and 7.
Section II
Participants were asked to describe themselves, their computer resources and their
access to the Web. Of the 497 responses displayed in Table 5, 68% lease a computer or
Web TV, 68% have easy access to a computer or Web TV, 55% use the computer or
Web TV for farm business, 60% have access to the Web, 58% have access to email and
56% have access to the Internet.
Table 5. Percentage of participants with and without computer resources.
Computer Resources
n
%
with*
n
Own or lease a computer or Web TV
339
68%
158
31«% .
Have easy access to a computer or Web TV
340
68%
157
32%
Use the computer or Web TV for farm business
272
55%
225
45%
Have access to the Web
298
60%
199
40%
Access to email
288
58%
209
42%
Access to the Internet
279
. 5694
218
44%
%
without*
*497 participants responded to the survey
Section IH
Included in the survey were questions aimed at identifying barriers encountered
by the participants when trying to access information on the Web. The respondents
ranked the factors in Table 6 as, 0 having no effect on their use of the web and 5 as
49
having the strongest effect on their use. Table 6 data reveal the respondents ranking of
factors that affect their use of the WWW. The highest ranking factor (3.90) was
familiarity with what the WWW offers, while the lowest ranking, lack of hardware (3.01)
indicates the relative effect the factors had on use of the WWW.
Table 6. Ranked Factors affecting PAT participants accessing information on the web.
Factors
. Familiarity with what the WWW offers
Ranking*
3.90
Lack of computer technical assistance or training
3.79
High telephone line charges
3.64
Lack of software
3.47
Monthly service provider charges
3.17
Lack of hardware
3.01
Friedman test results, N = 325, Chi-square = 97.492, DF = 5, Asymptotic Sig = .000.
*The scale was No Effect 0 , 1, 2, 3, 4, Very Strong Effect 5.
Section I
In an effort to prioritize the content of the PRN for potential users, participants of
the survey were asked to rank (0 least valuable - 8 most valuable) selected pest control
factors to their pest control decision-making. The data in Table 7 reveal the respondents
ranking. The highest ranking factor (6.39) was chemical control information, while the
lowest ranking factor (4.13) knowing required scouting frequency, indicates the relative
value of these factors.
50
Table 7. Pesticide Applicators rank the perceived value o f nine factors to their decision
making.
Factors
Ranking*
Chemical control information
6.39
Economic thresholds
5.37
Crop variety susceptibility information
5.25
Pest life cycle
5.14
Conditions favoring susceptibility
4.97
Typical infestation pattern in fields
4.68
Symptoms and look alike symptoms
4.60
Cultural control information
4.47
Knowing required scouting frequency
• 4.13
Friedman test results, N = 433, Chi-square = 275.742, DF = 8, Asymptotic Sig = .000.
*The scale was Least Valuable 0 , 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Most Valuable.
Do people in PAT Region 2 with access to computers and Intemet prioritize
factors affecting their use of the Web to a similar degree of importance as those without
access to computers or the Internet? Table 8 and Table 9 data shows how those without
access and those with access to a computer ranked factors affecting their use of the
WWW. The means for those with computer access varied from 3.73 to 3.20. While the
range was 3.77 to 3.11 for those without access. The Friedman test revealed that the
ranking of the factors were significant and those without computers ranked lack of
hardware (3.17) and software (3.75) and technical assistance (3.63) as the factors most
affecting their use of the WWW. Those with access to computers ranked fam iliarity with
what the WWW has to offer (3.73) as the factor that most affected use of the WWW.
51
Table 8. How participants with access to computers rank factors affecting their use of
the WWW._____________________________________________
________________With Access___________________________Ranking*
Familiarity with what the WWW offers
3.73
Lack of hardware
3.73
Lack of software
3.46
Lack of computer technical assistance or training
3.46
High telephone line charges
3.41
Monthly service provider charges
3.20
Friedman Test N = 258, Chi-Square = 27.733, D f= 5, Asymptotic Sig. = .000
*The scale was No Effect 0, 1,2, 3, 4, 5 Very Strong Effect.
Table 9. How participants without access to computers rank factors affecting their
use of the WWW.
Without Access
Ranking*
Lack of hardware
3.77
Lack of software
3.75
Lack of computer technical assistance or training
3.63
Familiarity with what the WWW offers
3.50
High telephone line charges
3.24
Monthly service provider charges
3.11
Friedman Test N = 44, Chi-Square = 11.942, D f= 5, Asymptotic Sig. = .036.
*The scale was No Effect 0,1,2, 3, 4, 5 Very Strong Effect.
52
Do people in PAT Region 2 with access to computers prioritize pest control
factors to a similar degree of importance as those in the same area without access to
computers or the Internet. In other words, are people with computers looking for
different information than those without computers? Table 10 and 11 data shows that if
participants with computers are looking for different information than those without
computers it was not revealed in the data. Rankings of factors most valuable to pest
control decision making by both those with and those without computers were the same.
Table 10. How participants with access to computers rank factors valuable to pest
control.
With Access
Rank*
Chemical control information
6.36
Economic thresholds
5.42
Crop variety susceptibility information
5.27
Pest life cycle
5.12
Conditions favoring susceptibility
4.94
Typical infestation pattern in fields
4.71
Symptoms and look alike symptoms
4.68
Knowing required scouting frequency
4.45
Cultural control information
4.43
Friedman Test N = 288, Chi-Square = 183.667, D f= 8, Asymptotic Sig. = .000.
*The scale was Least Valuable 0, I, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Most Valuable.
53
Table 11. How participants without access to computers rank factors valuable to pest
control.
Without Access
Rank*
Chemical control information
6.62
Economic thresholds
5.33
Crop variety susceptibility information
5.13
Pest life cycle
5.08
Conditions favoring susceptibility
4.91
Typical infestation pattern in fields
4.66
Cultural control information
4.52
Knowing required scouting frequency
4.45
Symptoms and look alike symptoms
4.30
Friedman Test N = 102, Chi-Square = 73.907, D f= 8, Asymptotic Sig. = .000.
*The scale was Least Valuable 0, I, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Most Valuable.
Rankings of factors least valuable to pest control decision making did reveal
some differences. Participants with access ranked Symptoms and look alike symptoms
(4.68) above Knowing required scouting frequency (4.45) and Cultural control
information (4.43). Participants without access ranked Symptoms and look alike
symptoms (4.43) last. Cultural control information (4.52) was ranked above Knowing
required scouting frequency (4.45).
54
CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
Pesticide Applicator Training (PAT) educators will face a continual challenge as
they respond to a public becoming more aware of the benefits of nutritious food and how
it is grown and delivered. Complex scientific information will continue to be an
important and complex component of producing and delivering a nutritious food supply.
Perceptions and acceptance of this research based information will continue to depend on
how the information is related to what the producer already knows and believes to be
practical.
The goal of Pesticide Applicator Training (PAT) is to deliver research based
information about pest control to participants who produce a nutritious food supply. This
study was conducted to evaluate the factors affecting the implementation of an electronic
pest recommendation network (PRN) for PAT in Montana. The findings reported in this
paper were determined using a pre-survey, training, control and post-survey of a portion
of the population. Participants in the study were pesticide applicators (n = 497) in
Montana PAT Region 2 (Choteau, Teton, Cascade, Toole and Pondera) counties.
Participants were randomly assigned to one or two groups: trained or control. The intent
of this study was to determine the following:
55
(1)
if PAT influences a participants level of use of the PRN;
(2)
if lack of hardware, software, monthly service provider charges, familiarity with
what the WWW offers, lack of computer technical assistance or training and/or
high telephone line charges influence if a participant uses the PRN; and
(3)
the perceived value by the PRN user of:
(a)
Crop variety susceptibility information
(b)
Conditions favoring susceptibility
(c)
Symptoms and look alike symptoms
(d)
Economic thresholds
(e)
Pest life cycle
(f)
Knowing required scouting frequency
(g)
Typical infestation pattern in fields
(h)
Cultural control information
(i)
Chemical control information
Data were collected using a three part survey instrument; I) Pest control
information needs; 2) Factors influencing use of the WWW; and 3) demographic
information. Reliability coefficients were calculated for the instruments and CronbacITs
alpha was found to be at the Alpha = .9040 for Section I) and Alpha = .8837 for Section
2).
Based on the analysis of data presented in Chapter.4, the following statements
summarize the findings. Results of the demographic section of the survey revealed that
over half of the surveyed participants at the Region 2 PAT re-certification session had
56
access to computer hardware, over half used it for farm business and over half had either
access to the Web or email. Participants ranked chemical control information, economic
thresholds, crop variety susceptibility information, and pest life cycle as most valuable to
their pest control decision making. Less valuable were conditions favoring susceptibility,
typical infestation pattern in fields, symptoms and look alike symptoms, cultural control
information and knowing required scouting frequency.
Conclusions
Based on the findings of this study, the following conclusions about factors
;
affecting the use of an electronic pest recommendation network by pesticide applicators
in Region 2 of Montana were drawn:
1.
The amount of training participants at the 2000 Region 2 PAT re-certification
I
program underwent did not significantly affect their accessing of the PRN.
:j
Participants use of an electronic pest recommendation network is essentially
:
equal when trained by a 15 minute lecture, that included slide images of the
software application and a supporting worksheet or by a worksheet alone.
2.
Participants with access to a computer found familiarity with what the WWW
::
offers and lack of computer hardware and software affected their use of the
;
WWW more than technical assistance, training, high telephone line or service
!
I
provider charges;
3.
1j
People without access to a computer find lack of computer hardware and
software, technical assistance affected their use of the WWW more than
I
57
familiarity with what the WWW offers training or high telephone line and high
service provider charges.
4.
Chemical control information, economic thresholds, crop variety susceptibility
information, pest life cycle, conditions favoring susceptibility, typical infestation
patterns in fields were ranked as most valuable by particpants regardless of their
access to a computer.
5.
The results suggest a large portion of the Region 2 population was aware of and
were using computers and the WWW for farm business.
Implications
On one hand, the results of the training implied that applicators regard historical
information sources as far more practical and trustworthy than the PRN. The PRN did
not offer enough advantages for participants to test it. On the other hand, participants
motivation and concerns about the effective and professional use of pesticides are low.
The motivation required to access and apply PAT information delivered by an unknown
source like the PRN may not match the concerns of the participant. In other words, a
participant has already expended effort in attending a PAT session and it would be
impractical to expend further effort in accessing the PRN for the same information and
less credit. If these participants encountered a situation that increased motivation, like a
high crop value or a new pests, a positive response to training might be more likely.
Currently, the PRN, and Case-based reasoning is not as adept at delivery of
chemical control information as it is at comparing tillage methods, long range rotations
58
and risk of pest damage. Chemical information ranked as most valuable to pest control
decision makers. The lack of specific chemical control information may have
contributed to the low PRN access rate by participants.
People are conditioned to expend a certain amount of effort to attend PAT
sessions every five years. They attend for PAT credits and not to Ieam about new
sources of information like the PRN. Over half of these same participants have access to
computers and the WWW which suggests they are interested in information and the
savings available through application of technology. To this researcher, this implies that
if the effort that participants expend attending PAT for credit could be shifted to
accessing the PRN for PAT credit, participant comfort and use of PAT information in the
daily decision-making process would be increased. The increasing prevalence and access
to computers and there use for farm business will decrease the effort required to access
and use the information available on the WWW.
Recommendations
The findings of this investigation, revealed the comparative effectiveness of PRN
training delivered using a worksheet plus fourteen slides and accompanying fifteen
minute lecture, to the same worksheet plus I slide and accompanying I minute lecture.
Based on these findings, the following recommendations were made.
I.
Further research is needed into how methods of delivery like the PRN can be used
to supplement or replace traditional PAT. Recertification credits awarded for
application of the PRN would help shift effort expended, physically attending
59
PAT, to effort expended studying and applying PAT. Since PAT via the PRN is
easier to attend, use of the PRN should increase.
2.
Research should identify a software structure that would respond to the users
level of concern and be less intimidating. A method of delivery that is less
intimidating will increase the acceptance of effective pesticide application
techniques and use of the PKN
3.
Research should identify what influence a decrease in face to face interaction and
increased global interaction using the advantages of e-mail and “chat” groups
would have on pesticide applicators who use the WWW for re-certification
credits instead of attending PAT sessions.
4.
Research should look at the impact of consultants who facilitate the use of the
PRN to allow their clients to make decisions.
5.
Research should look at the impact that in session use of the WWW has on
applicator access of the PRN.
60
REFERENCES
61
Attonaty, J., Chatelin, M., Garcia, F. (1999). Interactive simulation modeling in farm
decision-making. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 22. (2) 157 -170.
Ascough, I I J., Hoag, D., Frasier, W., McMaster, G. (1999). Computer use in agriculture:
an analysis of Great Plains producers. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture.
23,(3)189-204.
Avery, D. T. and Avery, A. (1996). Farming to Sustain the Environment. Indianapolis,
IN: Hudson Institute.
Barton, J., & Barbeau, W. (1992). Is Extension Ready for Food Safety Education in the
'90s? Journal of Extension. 30. (II.
Brookfield, S. (1992). Why Can't I Get this Right? Myths and Realities in Facilitating
Adult Learning. Adult Learning. April, (pp. 12-15).
Debord, K. B. (1991). Dispelling Myths About Rural Communities. Journal of
Extension. 29. (I).
DeYoung, B. & Harris, P., & Larson, L. (1995). Virtual Communities and University
Outreach. Journal of Extension. 33. (I).
Distance Education and Training Council. (2001). What is the DETC? 1998 Distance
Education Survey. [WWW document]. URL http://www.detc.org/
Dixon, N. M. (1994). The Organizational Learning Cycle: How We Can Leam
Collectively. London UK: McGraw-Hill (pp. 16).
Gall, D. M., Borg, W. R., and Gall, J.P. (1996). Education Research. An Introduction (6th
Edition). White Plains, NY: Longman, (pp. 474).
Gilmore, G. D., Meehjan-Struh, M., and Mormann, D. (1994). Food Safety Assessment
and Programming. Journal of Extension. 32. (2).
Hastings, J. D.; Branting, L. K., Lockwood, J., A. (1996). Computers and Electronics in
Agriculture. 16. (I) 47 - 67
Jones, C. (2000). Survey of Agricultural Practices on the Fairfield bench, Summary
Results. Montana Crop Health Report. 13. (4)5.
Knowles, M. (1980). The Modem Practice of Adult Education: From Pedagogy to
Andragogy. New Jersey NY: Cambridge/Prentice Hall Regents.
62
Lacefield, R.S. (1998). Adult Education Theory in Practice: Tips on Educating Adults.
Presented at the meeting of the International Association of Teacher Scholars'
[WWW document], Lilly Conference - South, Athens, GA. URL
http://members.tripod.com/~roberta/methods.htm
Lewis, T. (1998). Evolution of farm management information systems. Computers and
Electronics in Agriculture. 19. (3) 233-248.
Mertiam, S. B. and Caffarella, R. S. (1991V Learning in Adulthood: A comprehensive
guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Moore, M. 1991. Distance Education Theory. The American Journal of Distance
Education. I. (25).
Moore, M. G., and Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance Education: A Systems View. Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Montana Pesticide Education Program (2001). Pesticide Applicator Training Guidelines
for Montana [WWW document]. URL
http://scarab.msu.montana.edu/extension/PATCriteria.html
Montana Private Pesticide Applicator Training (2001). PAT [WWW document]. URL
http://Scai-ab.msu.montana.edu/extension/MTPPAT.html
Paulsen, M.F. (1995). Computer mediated communication and the online classroom.
Vol. BI: [WWW document]. The Online Report on Pedagogical Techniques for
Computer-Mediated Communication Hampton Press, Cresskill, NI, 31-57. URL
http://gaya.nki.no/~morten/cmcped.htm
Petroff, R. (2001). Off-label Uses of a Pesticide Can be Tragic. Montana Crop Health
Report. 14. (I).
Rossman, M. (2000). Andragogy and Distance Education: Still Together in the New
Millennium 2000. The American Journal of Distance Education. 10. (12).
Schank, R. C., and Leake, D. B. (1989). Creativity and learning in a case-based
explainer. Artificial Intelligence. 40. (1-3) 353-385.
SPSS hie. (1999). SPSS Base 10 Guide. Chicago.
Stem, K. S. (1996). A Force Upon the Plain. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
63
USDA (1995). H.E.L.P.S flyer: Accomplishments. [WWW document] URL
http ://www.reeusda.gov/
Verduin, R. Jr. and Clark, T. A. (1991). Distance Education: The Foundations of
Effective Practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass 11.
Virginia Tech University. Information Systems and Insect Study Lab Page. July 26,
(2000) [WWW document] URL http://www.isis.vt.edu/
Whitford, F. (1993). Pesticide Facts and Perceptions. Communicating with producers
and Consumers. Journal of Extension. 31. (I).
Zemke, R., and Zemke S. (1981). “30 Things We Know for Sure About Adult Learning,”
Training Magazine. June. Minneapolis: Lakewood Publications.
64
APPENDICES
65
APPENDIX A:
SURVEY OF PESTICIDE APPLICATORS ACCESSING THE WEB
66
Survey of Pesticide Applicators accessing the Web.
Section I: Pest (Weeds, Insects, Plant Diseases) Control Information Needs:-------------------------------Please use the following scale to rate how valuable the selected pest control factors are to your pest control
decision making. Please circle your choice.
How valuable for pest control is:
--------0 being least valuable and 8 being most valuable--------
Crop variety susceptibility information
Conditions favoring susceptibility
Symptoms and look alike symptoms
Economic thresholds
Pest life cycle
Knowing required scouting frequency
Typical infestation pattern in fields
Cultural control information
Chemical control information
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
Section II: Internet Access:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------In an effort to better supply you with timely pest control information we are considering putting more IPM
resources on the World Wide Web. You can help us determine how best to present information on the Web
by describing who you are and what kind of computer resources you have now. Please circle your choice.
1. Do you (the operator) own or lease a computer or Web TV?
Yes Don’t Know
No
2. Do you (the operator) have easy access to a computer or Web TV? Yes Don’t Know
No
If you answered No or Don’t Know to either I or 2 go to section III.
3. Do you (the operator) use the computer or Web TV for farm business?
Yes
Don’t Know
No
4. Do you have access to the Internet?
Yes
Don’t Know
No
5. Do you have access to email?
Yes
Don’t Know
No
6. Do you have access to the Web?
Yes
Don’t Know
No
Section III: Factors Influencing Your Current use of World Wide Web (WWW) Network:------------Please rate, using the following scales the degree to which the following factors have affected your decision
to use the WWW in your day to day activities. Circle the appropriate number of the degree to which the
factor affected your decision. Please circle your choice.
0 being No Effect and 5 being a Very Strong Effect.
How does this affect your web use:
Lack of hardware
Lack of software.
High telephone line charges.
Monthly service provider charges
Lack of computer technical assistance.
Familiarity with what the WWW offers.
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
Other.
Section IV: Demographic Information:-----------------Name or Applicator license number:
__________
Please circle the terms that describe you most accurately:
Applicator type: Private
Commercial
Restricted.
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
67
APPENDIX B:
PEST RECOMMENDATION NETWORK SURVEY
68
D u r in g y o u r la s t P R N s e s s io n o n 0 9 - 2 8 - 2 0 0 0 , y o u e n te re d c a s e 1 0 4 6 3
T h e ta c tic a l a n d s tra te g ic a d v ic e y o u r e c e iv e d in y o u r la s t s e s s io n w a s N o R is k
I f y o u D ID N O T fo llo w th is a d v ic e , p le a s e c h o o s e f r o m th e fo llo w in g list th e te r m U a t m o s t c lo s e ly r e f le c ts t h e c o n tr o l m e th o d y o u D ID u s e
L„___________________ M
F o llo w u p in f o r m a tio n e n te r e d b y T
T h e r e c o m m e n d a tio n y o u r e c e iv e d d u r in g y o u r la s t s e s s io n w a s th e r e s u lt o f m a n y y e a rs o f r e s e a r c h a n d e f f o r t, it h a s b e e n p r o v e n e ffe c tiv e in
o th e r situ a tio n s P le a s e tell u s a b o u t th e a d v ic e y o u r e c e iv e d d u n n g y o u r la s t P R N s e s s io n
0 - N o E ffe c t
2 - W eak E ffe c t
4 • S tr o n g E f f e c t
1 - V e ry W e a k E f f e c t
3 - M o d e ra te E f f e c t
5 - V e ry S tr o n g E f f e c t
F a c to r
I
o
W a s th e P R N m f o rm a tio n y o u r e c a v e d m y o u r la s t q u a y e ffe c tiv e ?
r
W a s th e m f o m tiU o n y o u r e c a v e d fr o m t h e P R N e f f e c tiv e in d e te rm in in g t h e c o r r e c t u s e o f c u ltu ra l o r c h e m ic a l
c o n tro ls ?
W a s th e in fo rm a tio n y o u r e c e iv e d fr o m th e P R N tim e ly e n o u g h to b e e ffe c tiv e ?
W o u ld y o u r a t e th e u s e f u ln e s s o f Ih e P R N in fo rm a tio n y o u re c e iv e d in y o u r la st P R N s e s s io n m o r e e f f e c tiv e
3
4
$
NA
r r r
r r r r r r <?
r r r r r r If
C r
r
th a n in fo rm a tio n y o u r e c e iv e d th r o u g h o th e r w o r k s h o p s , m e e tin g s , P A T s e s s io n s y o u a tte n d e d th is y e a r?
2
C r
r
r
r
Cf
P le a s e e n te r a n y a d d itio n a l in fo rm a tio n U til y o u flu n k w o u ld b e h e lp M in e v a lu a tin g y o u r situ a tio n .
On-line Survey of Pesticide Applicators accessing the Web.
First Name:
MI:
Last Name:
Address:
City:
State: Zip Code:
Email:
Information you request during this session will be used primarily in the following situation:
Producer Certified Crop Advisor County Agent Ag Business
Are you a Certified Pesticide Applicator?: No Yes - Private Yes - Restricted
How did you find out about the MSU Pest Recommendation Network?:
Pest Control Needs
Please rate how valuable the selected pest control factors are to your pest control decision making. Check
you choice on the supplied scale of 0-8 (8 being most valuable).
How valuable for pest control is:
Crop variety susceptibility information
Conditions favoring susceptibility
Symptoms and look alike symptoms
Economic thresholds
Pest life cycle
Knowing required scouting frequency
Typical infestation pattern in fields
Cultural control information
Chemical control information
--------0 being least valuable and 8 being most valuable-------0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
Factors Influencing Your Current use of World Wide Web (WWW) Network
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
69
Please rate the degree to which the following factors have affected your decision to use the WWW in your
day to day activities. Check the appropriate number of the degree to which the factor affected your
decision.
How does this affect your web use:
0 being No Effect and 5 being a Very Strong Effect.
Lack of hardware
Lack of software.
High telephone line charges.
Monthly service provider charges
Lack of computer technical assistance or training.
Familiarity with what the WWW offers.
Other.
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
I
I
I
I
I
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
70
APPENDIX C:
PEST RECOMENDATION NETWORK WORKSHEET
71
MSU IPM
Pest Rwommendatioii Network
IGet Advice - Weede || QetAdirioe - InsectB |GetA<Mc& - Dageases-j
Yoti -will' lb* asketl foi’ (kmci-grapM* infbmatioa amd a descdpthn of your eiumint pi'obkm.
Will Lanier, Martha Mikeleson and Dave Struefert developed this worksheet for potential
PRN users.
Small Grain production is a complex and dynamic process. Management of Small grain
pests is an important aspect of this process. Recommendations based on correct
identification of agronomic pests is the first and most important step in timely pest
management. The MSU Weed, Insect and Disease diagnostic services provide Montana
producers’ pest identification services. A database, the Pest Recommendation Database
(PRD), contains the daily recommendations made by Extension specialists and staff for
production agriculture concerning pest management in Montana conditions.
Recommendations include pest biology, life cycles, and cultural controls for individual
situations. The recommendations are the results of research and agronomic considerations
regarding the economic realities of arid crop production. The chemical control
recommendations include cost, timeliness, and efficacy as well as safe guidelines for use.
Historically this information has been delivered to producers via Extension presentations,
the postal service and personal communication via phone and fax systems. In an effort to
explore novel methods of delivering diagnostic information the Pest Recommendation
Network (PRN) has been developed. The PRN is a new method of delivering
management information contained in the PRD for small grain pests on the World Wide
Web. This information delivered by the PRN is organized in a way that allows
agriculturists to investigate effects of basic crop production variables on common small
grain pests. The PRN gives situation-specific advice for control. The steps, and examples
in the following worksheet describe the PRN attributes.
WWW access
You will need access to the WWW and a recent version of a WWW browser and a
computer operating at least Windows 95.
Organization
The PRN employs a novel organization method called case-based reasoning.
Cases describing situations are created from a list of factors and related conditions. An
example of a factor is “Forecast.” Conditions that might describe this factor are “Cool
and wet” and “Warm and dry”. The same list of factors and related conditions are used to
describe insect, plant disease, and weed situations. The common list of factors allow
72
specialists and users to view the implications of for example, a Weed control, and the
implications of that same control measure in the context of insects and plant disease
management.
For more information contact Will Lanier, 422 Leon Johnson Hall, Montana State
University, Bozeman Montana, 59717 (406) 994-5690, email: wlanier@montana.edu. To
view project information visit the MSU EPM home page at
http://scarah.msu.inontana.edu/ipm/. choose "Pest Recommendation Network".
73
Task I.
Your first task is to determine the possible plant diseases you might encounter in the
current growing season, an example is described below. The second task (exercises I to
4) is to determine the implications if any, the recommended plant disease control
practices, if implemented, will have on possible weed and insect pests.
Using a WWW browser go to http://scarab.msu.montana.edu/PRNl/ This is the home
page for the "Pest Recommendation System” (PRS). Overviews and project descriptions
are available below the heading by choosing “Progress Report, Slide explanation” or
“Poster Style explanation”.
MSU IPM
Pest Recommendation Network
Get Advice - Weeds Get. Advice - Insects Get Advice - Diseageg
You will be asked for dcmographie information and a description of your current problem
Once you are at the PRN home page, choose "Get Advice - Diseases" and you will see:
This Prsl RecmrflMnd-Itian N Mwmk(PRN) is Ihe resui: of many ye-us of research and h u d work on cample* pro Wrms
lfyou u t » new use: to the system, please tell us ibout Yomsttf eo we can focus our fittwe efforts to meet your needs
lfy au have previously used the PKH system, please identify yourself by entering your nanii below.
H am e
|
C o n lln o e
C i r t s r y o i I t u i t i t « co**>*H r t r t e e l
m w a . it
JeJsi
|
y t a w 'J s e i In ie ffn a U e n
0 PaU x)
Now you are presented with a list of 4 factors. Each factor has a drop down list of
conditions to choose from. Use the worksheet suggestions listed below to tour the
systems' attributes. This will facilitate information retrieval and "what i f queries in
following sessions.
Please describe your situation by filling tn each of the following conditions
Disease Common Name:
3
3
Dryland. Imgated, Range or Storage | DrlUnd
Crop Type:
|* * i e i t
Location in Stale:
[ Ctiovtaflir
Centinva
I
s p rin g
-d
3
|
74
Now you are presented with another longer list. This information helps the PKN rank solutions to situations
matching yours. Enter the conditions in each factor as indicated below. Hint: If you receive this worksheet
electronically, size the word processing and browser windows so they are side by side, easing data entry.
Inform ation exists that is related to your situation. Please further describe your
situation using the follow ing conditions. L eave blank any that you are unable to
answer.
Factors
Enter these Conditions
Id e n tific a tio n C o n fid e n c e :
Current Crop Stage:
Previous Crop (last year):
Previous Crop (2 years ago):
Seedling
wheat, spring
wheat, spring
L O W - T h re s h o ld ( % T ille rs a ffe c te d ):
H I G H - T h re s h o ld ( % T ille r s a ffe c te d ):
L O W - T h re s h o ld ( % A r e a a ffe c te d ):
H I G H - T h re s h o ld ( % A r e a A ffe c te d ):
P a t t e r n o f P e s t in F ie ld :
Scouting Frequency:
annual, spring
S e e d in g D a te :
R o w S p a c in g :
S e e d b e d P r e p a r a tio n :
Y ield Potential:
high
P o te n tia l C r o p L o ss:
Crop Prices:
low
V o lu n te e r P r e s e n t a f t e r S e e d in g (F a ll):
V o lu n te e r P r e s e n t A f te r S e e d in g (S p rin g ):
P re s e n c e o f W h e a t C u r l M ite s :
P ro x im ity o f S u ita b le H o s ts :
S oil M o is tu re a t S e e d in g :
Forecast:
cool and w et
H is to r y in F ie ld /C r o p :
W e e d C o n tr o l in S u m m e r F a llo w :
H e rb ic id e s A v a ila b le :
F u n g ic id e s A v a ila b le :
S e e d T r e a tm e n ts U s e d :
R e sc u e P e s tic id e A v a ila b le :
N itro g e n L e v e ls U s e d :
P h o s p h o r o u s L e v e ls U s e d :
Previous Crop R esidue Levels:
S y m p to m s:
m oderate
75
When you have entered the above conditions choose “Continue”.+
After a pause, you will see a results screen. In the top portion of the screen, above the
table are two recommendations. Below the recommendations are instructions on uses of
the information contained in the table.
O v e r a l l S y s t e m R e c o m m e n d a t i o n : T a n k m ix. A p p l y f o ih a i p e s t i c i d e
T h i s s o l u t i o n w a s u s e d i n m a n y s i t u a t i o n s ( c a s e s ) t h a t r e s e m b le y o u r s
T h e S y s te m a lso c o n s id e r s a r e c o m m e n d a tio n b a s e d o n th e s in g le s itu a tio n ( c a s e ) w ith th e b e s t m a tc h t o y o u r s .
T h a tre c o m m e n d a tio n
is to : A p p l y
f o ilie r p e s t i c i d e , i f e c o n o m ic s a re g o o d .
I f y o u d e s ir e , y o u m a y u s e y o u r o w n j u d g e m e n t t o s e l e c t a r e c o m m e n d a t i o n . L i s t e d b e l o w a t e c a s e s t h a t m a t c h e d s o m e o f t h e c o n d i t i o n s i n
y o u r c a s e . Y o u m a y o b t a i n f u r t h e r in f o r m a t i o n a b o u t e a c h c a s e b y c lic k in g o n t h e c a s e n a m e .
V ie w S o lu tie n Sooreg
|
D one |
Results screen explanation:
Comments.
The "Overall System Recommendation" is determined by counting the solutions
appearing most frequently in the result screen you are viewing.
The second recommendation is based on a single situation, appearing in the solutions
table, matching yours.
Following the result summaries is a table ranking the solutions to cases matching yours.
An explanation of this table follows.
S im ilarity S c o re
O uww U tbe
S o lu tio n U t e d i n S itu e tio n
t±u«liaru m*l£h
D is e a s e C o n u tio n H a m e
r***)
760 20
A p p ly fb iliar p e s tic id e , i f e c o n o m ic s
are g o o d
713.70
A p p ly fo ilia r p e s tic id e , i f e c o n o m ic s
are g o o d .
690JO
S p e c ia lis t
I
TanSpot
A p p ly fo iliar p e s tic id e , i f e c o n o m ic s
C a s e N am e
D a te E n te re d
10376
0 2 .2 5 4 9 9 9
2121
0 5 -0 1 4 9 9 3
10275
0 2 -2 5 4 9 9 9
T a n S p o tO l 0
0 4 -1 7 4 9 9 3
are g o o d
46920
A p p ly fo ih a i p e s tic id e , i f e c o n o m ic s
are g o o d .
TanSpot
M a r th a M ik k c lse n
•469 JO
T a n k mix. A p p ly fo iliar p e s tic id e
T an Spot
M a r th a M ik k e lse n
T a n S p o t 07 6
04474998
j469 JO
T a n k mix. A p p ly fo iliar p e s tic id e
Tan S pot
M a rth a M ik k e lse n
T ap SSppt Mt 0
0 4 1 7 -1 9 9 3
469 30
T a n k mix. A p p ly fo iliar p e s tic id e
Tan S pot
M a r th a M iK k c lte n t U i S p o U i Q
0 4 1 7 -1 9 9 8
R o ta tio n
TanSpot
M a r th a M ik k e lse n
T u iS p o tQ Q Q
0 4 1 7 -1 9 9 3
457 10
Table Explanation.
The first column, Solution Scores, contains values that were determined by cased-based
reasoning or simply weighting and matching the factors that were entered in the second
76
screen (top of page 3). The Similarity Scores are relative values and not absolute.
The second column contains "Tactical Advice" or what to do now. Each case also
contains general advice or what to do over time or next season. To view the general
advice, click the mouse twice on any case name. This is the best way to see if your
description, the entries you made, was sufficiently detailed and if it matched other cases
resembling yours. In other words, examine the cases with the highest values and compare
it with yours. View the general and tactical advice in a couple of high-ranking cases.
Note: Often viewing a case in detail will remind the user of other important factors.
Choosing cases that include a textual "Case Name" and "Specialist" over cases that only
have a high "Similarity Score." Cases with numbers for names are automatically
generated by the Diagnostic Lab databases and will be covered in another worksheet.
Task I Sum m ary
The PRN compares each case to the one you described. Treat these recommendations as
"Check Lists" of important factors concerning pests, to remember in the cropping
situation you described. Note the differences and decide if you can add conditions to
better describe your situation and thus improve the PRN’s ability to list important factors.
The worksheet examples will cause similarity scores suggesting that the disease “Tan
Spot” could occur in your cropping situation. On the other hand, “Wheat Streak Mosaic”
is not as likely to occur as it has a lower similarity score (examine a Wheat Streak Mosaic
case to see what conditions favor it compared to Tan Spot). You have completed the
introductory tasks to the PRN, if you would like to know more continue to Task 2.
Task 2.
To increase your knowledge of what the PRN has to offer, complete the exercises below
by examining a Tan Spot case with a high similarity score by choosing the “Case Name”
and reading the “General and Tactical Advice”.
Exercise I .
Summarize the Disease control recommendations in your own words.
Disease Name:
General control (strategic advice or long term solutions)
Tactical control (immediate or short term solutions)
Return to the results by choosing the "Return to Results" button.
Often the "Overall System Recommendation" and the "Single Situation"
recommendations will differ. You can see another tally of the rankings by choosing
"View solution Scores." This tally might help you decide whether to follow the solution
77
determined by the “Single situation (case) with the best match” or the “Overall System
Recommendation: ’’
Exercise I. additional study:
Ifyou wanted to refme/view the Disease recommendations, return to the list containing
"Disease Common Name:" by using your browser "Back" menu option. Choose and enter
the Tan Spot in the Common Name field. Choose continue and re-enter conditions
specific to the situation (page 2). The PRN will rank a list of cases more specific to the
disease and situation. Print these list screens for extra credit.
Exercise 2
To determine the risk of potential insect and weed problems under the same conditions,
hide the "Get Advice- Disease" window and click on the desktop browser icon again, this
will cause a second browser window to appear. Go to
http://scarab.msu.montana.edu/PRNl/. hi this window choose "Get Advice - Insects."
Enter your name, and choose "Continue". Then in the "Get Advice - Insects" window
enter the same condition examples listed on page 2 of this worksheet.
Due to the nature of different pests, the factors evaluated for a Disease are not the same as
those evaluated for a Insect or Weed problem. Enter the conditions that are common to
the Insect ,and the worksheet list (see page 2). Do not be worried if the work sheet list
does not match the Insect factors displayed by the PRN.
What are the Insect pests that are most likely to occur in the example-cropping situation?
a. )
b. )
c. )
Summarize the insect control recommendations by viewing a few high-ranking cases.
Compare the insect recommendations to the Plant disease recommendations you
summarized in Step A.
Insect Name:
General control (strategic advice or long term solutions)
Tactical control (immediate or short term solutions)
Plant disease:
General control (strategic advice or long term solutions)
Tactical control (immediate or short term solutions)
78
a.) Do any of these Insect recommendations conflict with the Disease control
recommendations?
b.) Do any of these recommendations compliment the Disease control recommendations?
An optional exercise with weed factors instead of Insect or Disease.
Exercise #3
To determine the risk of potential weed problems under the same conditions, open a third
browser window and go to http ://scarab .msu.montana. edu/PRNl A and choose "Get
Advice Weeds." Enter the Weed conditions that are in common with the examples on
page 2 of this worksheet.
What are the Weed pests that are most likely to occur?
a. )
b. )
C-)
Summarize the Weed control recommendations by viewing a few high ranking cases.
Compare the Weed recommendations to the Insect and Plant disease recommendations
you summarized in Exercise #2.
Weed name:
General control (strategic advice or long term solutions)
Tactical control (immediate or short term solutions)
Insect name:
General control (strategic advice or long term solutions)
Tactical control (immediate or short term solutions)
Plant disease name:
General control (strategic advice or long term solutions)
Tactical control (immediate or short term solutions)
79
Questions
a.) Do any of these Weed recommendation conflicts with the Insect or Disease control
recommendations?
b.) Do any of these recommendations compliment the Insect or Disease control
recommendations?
Exercise 4
Complete your Pest Recommendation Network session by comparing your summaries of
control recommendations. Investigate the common control practices for the highestranking pests. Enter these conditions in each of the Insect, Weed, and Plant Diseases
browser windows.
For example; the beginning case description (page 2) entered the same crop (Wheat,
spring) in "Previous Crop last year" and "Previous Crop 2 years ago". The
recommendation for Plant Disease advises rotation into another crop. Enter a possible
rotation crop and see if the resulting recommendations are those for a less risky situation.
Refine the bisect and Weed rankings by using the browser "Back " menu option and
adding the respective "Common Name" and re-entering the conditions.
hi addition to a check list of pests ranked by factors, the PRN can help a producer foresee
situations when changing a management practice for one pest could allow other pests to
become established. Often resources are limited and applying them to control one pest
means resources are not available for management of another. Look for threshold
information that might help you decide when a switch from a practice, which controls a
disease, but encourages an insect or weed pest would be appropriate. For example
rotations are a cultural way of controlling pests, but often they are less profitable.
Exercise 4, Additional study
Using the "No Risk", "Medium Risk" and "High Risk" Tactical recommendations try to
decide for either an insect, disease and weed situation when it is economical to switch
from a rotation or back to a monoculture. List the case names you based your decisions on
for extra credit.
Hint: Change the Previous Crop (last year) and Previous Crop (2 years ago) and see the
controlling effects this has on different Pests.
You have completed Task 2 and should be well acquainted with what the PRN has to
offer.
80
sI
APPENDIX D:
PEST RECOMMENDATION NETWORK TRAINING GROUP SLIDES
81
Monitoring: W ho to ask?
Monitoring: Where to look
►Compare records with stale
survey's and observations.
►Online databases available from
IPM programs at Land grant
universities.
►specialists (Land Grant U's)
» newsletters (MCHR)
►online databases (PRN)
Monitoring: Where to look
►WWW
» WWW sollware that makes finding and
viewing distant information easy.
» using the WWW. remote users (producers,
agents, specialists) can access databases.
I — Monitoring: Where to look
►Pest Reconunendalion Network
examples:
►three or four questions creates a report
based on current information.
» Big Deal! so do newspapers.
►net-worked (WWW) decision support
information available to desk top
computers.
Monitoring: Where to look
►WWW databases
►static databases. MSU Extension stall"or
the Diagnostic Lab listing database.
►dynamic database Pest Recommendation
Network (PRN) handles sorting, report
generation, and "what i f scenarios.
Monitoring: Where to look
►Well the big deal is that this report is not
only specific to crops, areas, seasons,
locations but also across subjects.
* more than one expert contributes
►OK. it's better than a newspaper, but I
need expertise that knows which way the
wind blows in Montana.
82
t*
ivw Ijc LmuKMc u«p
, : ^fBntfaMriu J i ler^T t|ien//w l
GQ
rm/rhinpiyffin f Xe
— Monitoring: Where to look
~3 B
Se/?#j
Please describe your situation by filling in each o f the following conditions:
►Ask Ihc PRN what pests are occuring
in Barlcx and you can vicxx reports of
Weeds. Insects, and Diseases.
Insect Com mon Nam e:
|R'js«tan w n e a * f nio
3
D ryland, Irrigated, Range or Storage: foulard
wheal, winter wi
Crop Type:
- current or Ihis time Iasl season
►compare severity
x consider the implications o f one pest
eontrol measure in the context of oilier
pest control measures.
H
Location in State:
Hingetand
S
Return I o Hor wheat, spring
Ine
http-i/bridgar.finl
m ri14
i
&
V
_____________
[I. t * View 6* j a m * * *
%
Jk L00lleK|'iO//W.e#*rxn/etim«WCW(:«
ft" I * !Jw» fio io«wvn«ta Bst1
. ( " EeetosKU ^ UxMmfi^/.-WuisrtwvcliittoiVCefitw
^3 S
Step #2
Information otists th at is related to your sin u tio a P leise further describe your situation using the
following conditions. Leave blank any (hat y o u are unable to answer.
Identification C onfidence
fri5T3
C urrent Crop Stage:
!seeding
LO W - Infestation L cv eb P b T ile rs affected): [
3
H IG H - Infestation L ev eb (% Tillers affected): |
3
L O W - Infestation L ev eb (% Area affected):
H IG H • Infestation L ev eb
A rea Affected):
I f you desire, you may use your own judgement to select a recommendation. Listed below ate cases
that matched some of the conditions n your cate. Y ou m ay obtain further information about each
ease by clicking on the case name.
I— a
I— a
ill jw wd the
Scouting Frequency:
11 UnebweK
Seeding Date:
I
[*
zl
Speciaist
Date Entered Case Name
Common
SpotSpray
Oreg Johnson m - i8 ..9 9 e
3
d
OeaeieN- Done
m
- X -xZ
■-inIxI
X * Iio .Ccwronceta Bep
EeekisKU £ loeator[rtTt.//W:i»sccav'ebiiae»i/C»F fxe
ML
low— o «
a
»
F S tE iy ts w f r . Cow— W H n___________________
y
j i Ueelacjipyzaaw i^<ctoc«t«^aM n
Results
Step #2
Overall System Reeommcndatioa Chemical
This solution w as isscd in many situations (eases) that resemble yours.
foBowing conditions. Leave blank any that you arc unable to answer.
IdentificationC onfidanec
|riafi
C urrent Crop Stage:
| seeding
LO W - Infestation Levels (% T ile n affected):
|
3
LO W • Infertation Levels (% Area affected):
3
|
HIGH - Infestation Levcb (% Area AflFected): |
3
------------------------- —
Similarity
it.v.v
3
!moderate patches
Scouting Frequency:
| t tsr e.vte<
Seeding Date:
I
Yield Potential:
H O B H lIj
The System also considers a recommendation based on the single skisation(ease) with the best
match to youn.
T hat recommendation is to: Spot Spiay
I f you desire, you may use y o tr own judgement to select a recommendation. Lilted below a n cases
that matched some o f the conditions n your case. Y ou m ay obtaai further information about each
care by clicking on the care name.
3
H IO H - Infestation Levels (% T illen affected): |
Pattern o f Pest in Field:
Solution used m
3
Yield Potential:
if
The System also considers a recommendation based on the single siluation(ease) with the best
match to yours.
T hat recommendation is to: Spot Spray
"3
Imodenne patches
Pattern o f Pest in Field:
Results QSSt
O veral System Recommendstioa- Chemical
lliis solution w is used in many situations (cases) that resanblc yours.
3
die
Solution used in
Situation
Specialist
Spot Spray
Oreg Johnson 01.18-1998
Date Entered Case Name
Common
3
Tank mix, Apply
Gteg Johnson
foiiar spray
-1.18.1998
W
g
U
W
t ^
T
to ,^
^
^
83
Monitoring: Where to look
►The problem an Extension agent or
specialist has is their ability to gather
research based information from remote
areas, process it for patterns that suggest
economic damage and deliver it in a
timely manner to clients.
— Monitoring: Where to look
►Extension agents or specialists can onl\
liave so many phone conversations.
►PRN
» raises (incrementaly) the level o f question
that can he answered without direct
interaction.
►allows for multiple interactions on specilie
topics without the problems of direct
communication.
84
APPENDIX E:
PEST RECOMMENDATION NETWORK CONTROL GROUP SLIDE
Monitoring: Who to ask?
►Compare records with stale
survey's and observations.
►specialists (Land Grant LTs)
►newsletters (MCHR)
» Iinlinc
databases (FRN)